There is a big difference between "spending" and "investing". If you put your money in the stock market you are investing it - attempting to make your money grow. In the same way - when the Government invests money in our infrastructure and stimulus programs - we are "investing" our tax dollars to stabilize the economy and help it grow. Once people are back to work on the new roads trains and bridges they will earn more money and tax revenues will increase. In fact they will make more money building those projects. It's way more complicated than that but it is important to understand that when the GOP claims Democrats have a spending problem, they don't understand the concept of investments. The stimulus programs that helped bail out the auto industry saved those companies from bankruptcy, kept the people working and the loans are being paid back. It was not money "Spent" it was money "Invested". Investments take time to work. If you put your money in the stock market today and pull it out a week later, you will likely not make a profit - and in fact you may lose money. Smart investing takes time.
Every investment has risk. If there were a guaranteed investment strategy - we would all be rich. Some investments work well - others may fail. The auto industry investments seem to be working, while the bank bailouts are very questionable. If we learn from those that fail we can invest more wisely the next time. If not we are doomed to failure. The jury is still out on whether our stimulus investments were done wisely - but it is important to realize that it is way too soon to tell.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
I guess Andre doesn't "work" weekend. Have a good one!
Dennis winks at Lisa and wishes her a very nice weekend as well!
Winks back.
From Peter Kirsanow,addressing the President today in a blog post at National Review Online:
"Throughout the debt-ceiling debate, you’ve repeatedly referred to federal spending as “investments.” Since the beginning of your administration, your ”investment” spree has added more than $4 trillion to the national debt. At the same time, GDP growth is at an anemic 1.8 percent, the nation’s credit rating is in jeopardy, the deficit is at $1.7 trillion, the nation’s energy and transportation infrastructures continue to deteriorate, the housing market remains in the tank, unemployment is at 9.2 percent, and federal entitlements are imploding.
Do you maintain that this is an adequate rate of return on your “investments?” Would you retain a personal portfolio manager with a similar “investment” record?"
You've heard that saying "Lead, follow, or get out of the way"?
Well, the President was removed from the process over the weekend (or he removed himself...it's not quite clear which), and lo and behold, some real progress seems to have been made today!
Of course, the devil is in the details, as they say...but based on the surface indications at least , I would like to encourage the President to spend even more time out on the golf links during the next 15 or so months...it won't even bother me that it's on the tax-payers's dime!
As Paul Rahe points out over at Ricochet.com:
"...Harry Reid has agreed to substantial spending cuts without tax increases, ... Ezra Klein at The Washington Post is reporting that the Republicans have won, and ... Barack Obama is, as is utterly predictable, throwing a gigantic hissie fit.
Folks, it rarely gets better. John Boehner is going to go down in history as one of the canniest Speakers of the House in the history of Congress. By dint of sheer persistence and patience, he has won the argument on expenditures and taxes hands down. The polling data is clear. The Democrats are on the run, and the adolescent in the White House is pouting. How sweet it is!
Now if only we could find a Republican presidential nominee capable of fully taking advantage of the disarray into which Barack Obama has plunged his party. Someone should give Paul Ryan another call."
Paul Ryan, you have to step up..the Nation needs you!
Interesting to see how you view holding the entire nation hostage is a good thing.
The Republican controlled House passed a Bill last week which allows the raising of the debt ceiling limit.
Reid refused to even allow that Bill to be discussed and debated in the Democrat controlled Senate by "tabling" the motion on Friday. So far, the Democrats have not submitted (let alone allowed a vote on) any plan whatsoever in the Senate.
Who is "holding the nation hostage"?
Because no bill presented shows any shared responsibility by the GOP. GOP is holding the gun.
Actually, upon further consideration, I would like to retract most of my last post.
I don't believe either side is "holding the nation hostage". I think that is just a cheap political slogan, a scare tactic that adds nothing of substance to the issues being debated.
Both sides are more or less doing what they are supposed to do, which is to stand and argue for what they believe is in the best interests of the nation.
The Republicans are attempting to reign in an out of control Federal Government that is addicted to spending, and the Democrats are trying evolve the United States into a European style social welfare state.
That is a perfectly legitimate political debate to be having.
What is freaking so many people out is the presence of the new House Republicans, who campaigned last year on the promise of no new taxes and cutting federal spending. Against all expectations, it appears these freshman legislators actually intend to keep their campaign promises!
That is a radical position in Washington, and the status quo (on both sides of the aisle) don't quite know how to handle it, because it is so far out of the range of most of their experience.
The House freshman didn't come to DC to "go along to get along", they came to DC to do the job that they were elected to do, and they know that if they let the folks back home down, the Tea Party activists will make sure they have primary challengers next year.
The rules have changed, and I think that in the long run, that will turn out, on balance, to be a good thing for all of us.
So - if the Democrats campaign and sign (stupid) pacts that they will never ever change entitlement programs - ever - and they stuck to that no matter what, will that "fix" the economy?
I believe our current President campaigned on that very platform. so there you have it - economy fixed!
I think that the answer to your question is "No, stupid policies, no matter how sincerely held by their proponents, will not fix the economy" (hence, the dismal performance of the Obama economy).
In the final analysis it is not the fidelity with which a politician adheres to his campaign promises which leads to the success or failure of his policies; rather it is the fundamental wisdom, or lack thereof, of those promises.
I would say a better answer is that a politician learn from their job. They may get elected on their principles, but when in office they must remain open minded and ever mindful that their ideology may not be correct or in the best interest of the entire country. Failure to learn and grow as a person and a politician is a failure of our country.
In a hypothetical sense I would agree completely with that.
However, in reality, I seriously doubt if any newly elected politician betrays his constituents and abandons his campaign promises because of some sudden intellectual enlightenment or revelation.
More likely such betrayals are born out of the head spinning corruption of newly obtained power and privilege. They are motivated less out of a heightened concern for what is in the best interest of the nation,and more out a newly heightened concern for personal aggrandizement and the glittering temptations that the path of insider careerism offers.
Human beings are infinitely corruptible.
A perfect segway to the next article I just posted.
Post a Comment