« What ??? You want more ??!! | cmaukonen's Blog | So Obama wants to "fix" Social Security and Medicare »
WHAT A REAL STIMULUS MIGHT LOOK LIKE
Sam Smith has some of the best ideas I have read right
here.
in Washington.
C
here.
- Reduce credit card interest.Too bad none of these things will be considered by anyone
As one politician once put it,
"I'd frankly like to see credit
cards rates down. I believe
that would help stimulate the
consumer and get consumer
confidence moving again.''
Another politician responded by
offering a bill in the Senate
to cap credit card interest at
14%. The Senate voted for it
74-19. The first politician was
that radical president, George
Bush, in 1991. The other
politician was that well known
progressive, Alfonze D'Amato.
Why are Obama and the Democrats
more conservative than Daddy
Bush and D'Amato?
- Start a movement to
nationalize banks. Progressives
led by Robert LaFollette did
this in the 1930s, giving FDR
cover for his more moderate
solutions. Today, all the
political pressure is coming
from Wall Street, which tilts
policies in that direction.
- All measures must put the
interest of the ordinary
citizen first. Neither the GOP
nor the Democrats are doing
that.
- De-emphasize tax cuts. They
are far less effective than
many think.
- Emphasize programs that will
cheer people up and where they
can see things changing for the
better. Among the Wall Street
bailout scam's many faults was
that no one could tell what was
happening as a result. Good
economies need optimism.
- Use revenue sharing. It's a
quick way to get money down to
the states and cities and to
the people who live there.
Sure, some of it will get
corrupted but far less than is
already happening with the
phony stimulus packages. The
upside is that citizens have a
better idea of what is being
done on their behalf and have
some say in how it is done.
- Fund public works project
that have large spin-off
benefits and which will be
heavy in blue collar
employment. These would include
new mass transit service and a
massive growth of America's
rail system. It would
deemphasize fixing up existing
systems because the spin off
benefits are far less.
- Institute a shared equity
program for homeowners in
distress under which the
federal government buys a
portion of the mortgage,
renegotiates interest rates
with the lenders and then gets
its part of the equity back
when the house is sold. A
similar program could be used
for building new homes.
- Decentralize decisions and
negotiations on foreclosures
and real estate interest rates,
using local courts and similar
bodies as was done in the
1930s.
- Give the government preferred
stock in companies it aids. At
one point in the New Deal, the
Reconstruction Finance
Corporation owned bank shares
that would be worth at least
$20 billion today.
in Washington.
C
Advertisement
"Emphasize programs that will
cheer people up and where they
can see things changing for the
better. Among the Wall Street
bailout scam's many faults was
that no one could tell what was
happening as a result. Good
economies need optimism."
Wow, now that IS a good idea. When my grandpa was a young man the CCC came to his farm and put in a large cement drain for a swampy area of the land. Today, the drains still stands and that once swampy land is still tillable. The CCC and that drain started a lifetime long admiration my grandfather had for FDR, politics, and American government.
Programs like these inspire the public, bring them happiness/confidence/appreciation, and prove to them that government works and is, you know, actually good for people. In short it shows them that their tax-money is put to good use.
Thank you for pointing this out in your post- not nearly enough people do. It's important people see results- it's important they see government working for them.
January 15, 2009 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also, reduce credit card interest? Sure, great idea. Though, I say, let's forgive some credit card debt too.
January 15, 2009 10:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forgive credit card debt ??? Now your getting just a bit to radical. (tung firmly implanted in cheek)
C
January 15, 2009 11:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tax cuts need to be part of the stimulus. They will get $ into the hands of the people much more quickly than infrastructure projects. They're already being de-emphasized by the Democrats thanks to brilliant minds like Dianne Feinstein and Charlie Rangel.
Also - capping credit card interest is a bad idea. All that's going to do is make the banks charge higher fees and higher rates to people that aren't currently at the "cap". Your idea might help that people who are maxed out on their cards but it will hurt everybody else.
January 16, 2009 7:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
You all do remember that the Great Depression lasted ten solid years in the Thirties, right? Despite (and/or because of) FDR?
That isn't a model I want to emulate.
January 16, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you mean because of Hooover. FDR didn't get into office until about 3 years plus into the Depression- the country was already well into a deep Depression by then- once your in it's very hard to get out. I will give you that FDR choosing to balance the budget after the economy started to recover was a bad idea that certainly prolonged things. So everybody remember- balancing the budget shouldn't be a priority until recovery has been attained and it is certain and stable.
January 16, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
My only point is that the 30's were not a period of enlightened economic policy; by modern standards American policy in the 30's was like a drunk trying to get to bed in the dark.
Rather aimless, not based on accurate knowledge, and occasionally painful.
Certainly running a fiscal deficit can offset short term pain. But getting excited about LaFollette and New Deal -Programs- as opposed to new deal -deficits- is a bit foolish in hindsight.
January 16, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not understand where you are coming from. Social Security, the SEC, FDIC, Glass-Steagall, etc, etc. These programs are bed-rock economic policies that were put in place by FDR in the 30's and for the most part have lasted until today. Except for Glass-Steagall- that was killed by Phil Gramm, Bill Clinton, and too many on both sides of the isle, in their lust for free markets. Indeed, if dismantling the New Deal wasn't such a high-priority in the 80's (largely led by Republicans and enabled by Reagan Democrats) we would not be in this mess today.
January 16, 2009 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
The National Recovery Administration, government price fixing, the Works Progress Administration (known at the time as "We Piddle Around"), the Civilian Conservation Corps, etc.
Now, it isn't that all New Deal programs are bad (indeed, I think the FDIC is a brilliant idea, and would be even more brilliant if enforced properly). It's just that the New Deal wasn't why the Depression lifted. The Second World War (7-9 years after Roosevelt took office) was.
The problems of regulation in this crisis need more hard thinking and less "Re Regulate!" in my opinion. Glass-Steagall was a silly law. But the revenue cap on financial counterparties (eliminated in 2003-2004 with little fanfare) was very important (and easy to enforce and understand!).
Deregulation is good, generally speaking. Less regulation is better than more regulation, as long as rules are in place that do what you think they need to do.
We ought to have a discussion first about what the rules need to do. (And no, "Stop this from happening again" is not an answer.)
January 16, 2009 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, WWII certainly helped pull us out the Depression. Who retrofitted factories to put people to work? Who helped put all those Americans to work in the factories? Who helped mothers who worked support themselves while there husbands were away over seas? FDR.
January 16, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
The WPA put 2.8 million people back to work initially. I'd look up some of the stories of those people and see how much that program changed their lives at the time. The WPA allowed these people to buy food, clothes, basic necessities. The WPA greatly benefited artists of the time. Jackson Pollock? WPA. The importance of the WPA to entertain people in these troubled times also can be dismissed. It was called a Depression for good reason. The 430,000 homeless from the Ohio River flood that the WPA helped aid would also disagree with your argument. The Lincoln Tunnel- that's the WPA too. NYC's first major airport- that was the WPA too. Oh, and WWII bullets, tanks, etc- many were built by WPA workers.
The "piddle around" saying comes from what were homeless WPA workers who helped clean and maintain city parks. I guess raking and lawn mowing is work that is looked down upon by some people.
January 16, 2009 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think splatter painting is a good use of taxpayer money, but that's because I think it is about as artistic as your average lobotomy patient scribbling with crayons. So Jackson Pollock isn't going to impress.
My point was not that the WPA didn't distribute money, my point was that the taxpayers didn't -get- anything significant for the money spent. Saying it handed out money isn't a defense of the WPA; it's a defense of handing out money. Government can always do that.
I was suggesting, in essence, that the government ought to think hard before it just puts together giant programs to pay people to fool around.
Paying people to do something useful is always better.
January 21, 2009 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The CCC was one of the most popular government programs ever- polled very favorably by both Dem and Repub alike at the time. The WPA put millions back to work. The AAA pulled hundreds of thousands of farmers out of poverty. The TVA was especially beneficial to farmers in Tennessee- farmers who are still using the land the TVA helped develop to this day. The NIRA benefited unions, raising incomes and set-up a growing middle class to be successful in the later 40's and 50's. The point of the New Deal was that the programs offered both short-term and long-term economic growth for this country. FDR new he was running up the defecit and realized short-term programs weren't gonna do it alone. Long-term benefits were going to be needed to help tackle those defecits. The legacy of FDR is not just what happened in the Great Depression and WWII. No, I would maintain the success of the U.S. in late 40's, 50's, and early 60's are also part of his legacy (along with all those other great bed-rock programs that are still in existence to this day).
January 16, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good points and goo post.
January 16, 2009 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
And Social Security has changed dramatically from what FDR introduced, so please don't try to tell us that it was a 'bed-rock" economic policy...It's still here but it looks a lot different than what FDR started
January 16, 2009 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's your point? FDR is the one who got the ball rolling, is he not? Chances are very good if FDR hadn't started it and that is if it wasn't so successful, it wouldn't be here today.
January 17, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't understand your original point on Social Security. I wasn't the one who brought it up.
January 17, 2009 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink