Obama's Rhetoric is the Real Catastrophe

[UGAalum94]

I don't think individuals have control over everything that happens to them certainly; I just think we have to be careful about what the the government does to "solve" problems. The government can create incentives and disincentives to shape individual behavior. I want to make sure we have carefully thought out any unintended consequences.

I'm not seeing that with current government spending.

ETA: I'd have to brush up to make a list of things that I don't think belong in it. Would you like me to do that?

Or would just suffice to say that my conception of safety nets have to do with temporary measure to carry people though especially hard times in terms of absolute necessities. And that my conception of stimulus spending would be specifically targeted spending with almost guaranteed outcomes (especially when it comes to job creation), rather than just throwing money at projects. My general impression of current spending in just getting anything that ever seem like it might be something a legislator wanted to see funded the funding required.

ETA: Looking at recovery.com, I'll immediately say that the category of broadband internet access shouldn't be there. Nor does clean water and flood control seem like it has anything to do with the economic downturn. Local school district spending is complicated. Sure the economic down turn has hurt local districts, but I don't think it's a federal issue, and I think only extremely poor districts ought to qualify for these funds, but that's not how it's shaking out in Georgia. Higher education and Pell grants don't belong here. Transforming energy systems should be funded someplace else. I can accept that in certain industries, depending on exactly where the money is being spent, it could be economically stimulating, but I think it's being done in a sloppy way which guarantees nothing. Certain aspects might even belong in homeland security.

Looking at Wikipedia, there's 50 million to the NEA to support artists, and I'm not sure about census preparation as economic recovery.

While some of these thing can be regarded as legitimate government funding, they shouldn't be sold to the public as part of the economic, fending off complete catastrophe, stimulus.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I don't think individuals have control over everything that happens to them certainly; I just think we have to be careful about what the the government does to "solve" problems. The government can create incentives and disincentives to shape individual behavior. I want to make sure we have carefully thought out any unintended consequences.

I'm not seeing that with current government spending.

Can you think of any examples?

Some consider the stimulus plan an incentive for some and disincentive for others.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Can you think of any examples?

Some consider the stimulus plan an incentive for some and disincentive for others.

Well, generally, I suppose I mainly think about taxes as creating incentives in certain areas on both the individual and business level. They can also create disincentives.

At the strongest level, I suppose we criminalize as our strongest disincentive. Is that what you are asking me?

What I wonder about with the stimulus bill in the areas that actually target what I'd consider to be directly related to the economic crisis it that by helping people and industries in the short term, we're rewarding what we want to see least, like mortgage non-payment or abandonment or irresponsible financial risk taking in business in the long term. OR to counteract this fear will see an new era of over-regulation that will hamper growth or home ownership.

ETA: let me add local school funding as an area in the sloppy areas of the stimulus. In metro Atlanta, several of the school systems pretty routinely conduct themselves in a financially wasteful way. What this funding teaches them is that if something really hurts their revenue stream they can expect the federal government to ride to the rescue, with apparently little accountability for the money they receive. Might it have been better instead to make them bear the cost for their foolish decision making coupled with the economic downturn? Perhaps. I feel like I should qualify this for anyone who thinks that the funding flows through to actually affect instruction for the kids by noting that isn't how it seems to go down. The systems with the highest spending per pupil often have the absolutely most crappy classroom conditions. The dysfunction in management prevents the money from getting to the classroom. The leadership of these systems could have made cuts to bring their costs under reasonable control, but now they don't have to.