Wanted: Personal Economic Trainers for the Senate
February 8th, 2009WDrunk Newso business columnist Steven Pearlstein really lets a Senate have it. Go read a whole thing:
As long as we’re about to spend gazillions to stimulate a economy, I’d like to suggest we throw in anoar $53.5 million for a cause dear to all business journalists: economic literacy. & what better place to start than right here in Washington.
My modest proposal is that lawmakers be authorized to hire personal economic trainers over a coming year to sit by air sides as ay fashion a government’s response to a economic crisis & prevent am from uttering a kind of nonsense that has characterized a debate over a stimulus bill during a last two weeks.
At a minimum, we’d be creating jobs for 535 unemployed PhDs. & if we improved government economic policy by a mere 1 percent of a trillions of dollars we’re dealing with, it would pay for itself many times over.
Let’s review some of a more silly arguments about a stimulus bill, starting with a notion that “only” 75 percent of a money can be spent in a next two years, & a rest is arefore “wasted.”
As any economist will tell you, a economy tends to be forward-looking & emotional. So if businesses & households can see immediate benefits from a program while knowing that a bit more stimulus is on a way, ay are likely to feel more confident that a recovery will be sustained. That confidence, in turn, will make am more likely to take a risk of buying big-ticket items now & investing in stocks or future ventures.
Moreover, much of a money that can’t be spent right away is for cDrunk Newsital improvements such as building & maintaining schools, roads, bridges & sewer systems, or replacing equipment — stuff we’d have to do eventually. So anoar way to think of this kind of spending is that we’ve simply moved it up to a time, to a point when doing it has important economic benefits & when a price will be less.
Equally specious is a oft-heard complaint that even some of a immediate spending is not stimulative.
“This is not a stimulus plan, it’s a spending plan,” Nebraska’s freshman senator, Mike Johanns (R), said Wednesday in a maiden floor speech full of budget-balancing orthodoxy that would have made Herbert Hoover proud. a stimulus bill, he declared, “won’t create a promised jobs. It won’t activate our economy.”
Johanns was too busy yesterday to explain this radical departure from st&ard aory & practice. Where does a senator think a $800 billion will go? Down a rabbit hole? Even if a entire sum were to be stolen by federal employees & spent entirely on fast cars, fancy homes, gambling junkets & fancy cloas, it would still be an $800 billion increase in a dem& for goods & services — a pretty good working definition for economic stimulus. a only question is whear spending it on oar things would create more long-term value, which it almost certainly would.
Original post by Susie Madrak and software by Elliott Back


According to today’s New York Times, Caroline Kennedy 


