Post by agito on Jan 9, 2009 16:43:27 GMT -6
grr- another from thomas sowell that i didn't see until i opened my local's paper reprint of it- found at townhall
basically- thomas sowell confuses whether the troubles with the recent bailout is a problem of privatization or keynesianism. he then argues that it is impossible for a politician to spend money on infrastructure. Lastly he repeats the argument that government is too slow, but fails to acknowledge that slow action is better than no action (as the non-action from the privatized spending of the recent bailout beneficiarys show)
first paragraph:
Two centuries ago, when there were plans to create a huge fund of money to pay off Britain's national debt, the great classical economist David Ricardo objected on grounds that-- no matter what the money was said to be for-- politicians could spend it for whatever they wanted.
Any word on how that deficit turned out for the brits mr sowell? (no- he doesn't tell us- it's a wasted paragraph)
second:
Two centuries later, we have not yet caught up to that plain reality, even though the $700 billion that was supposed to be used to rescue financial institutions has already begun to be spent on other things.
So who's fault is that? let's review, the fed "loans" the bailout money to the financial institutions. The institutions then use the money as they see fit to "save" themselves. Is this a fault of the politicians that the private industries didn't spend the money the way the politicians and/or the american citizens see fit. Or is it the fault of the private industries that were in control of the money?
Guess this means that the next bailout/stimulus funds shouldn't be put in the hands of private corporations right?
later:
One of the key reasons why infrastructure gets neglected, in the first place, is that there is very little political pay-off to filling potholes and repairing bridges, compared to spending that same money creating community centers, bike paths and other things
indeed- but even if the money is spent on community centers and bike paths, that is still spending that goes out to the people and creates jobs (unlike what we have seen transpire from tarp so far).
From there sowell rehashes old arguments of the speed of bureaucracy, but as i said before- there is no alternative presented by him or by the free market at this point.
basically- thomas sowell confuses whether the troubles with the recent bailout is a problem of privatization or keynesianism. he then argues that it is impossible for a politician to spend money on infrastructure. Lastly he repeats the argument that government is too slow, but fails to acknowledge that slow action is better than no action (as the non-action from the privatized spending of the recent bailout beneficiarys show)
first paragraph:
Two centuries ago, when there were plans to create a huge fund of money to pay off Britain's national debt, the great classical economist David Ricardo objected on grounds that-- no matter what the money was said to be for-- politicians could spend it for whatever they wanted.
Any word on how that deficit turned out for the brits mr sowell? (no- he doesn't tell us- it's a wasted paragraph)
second:
Two centuries later, we have not yet caught up to that plain reality, even though the $700 billion that was supposed to be used to rescue financial institutions has already begun to be spent on other things.
So who's fault is that? let's review, the fed "loans" the bailout money to the financial institutions. The institutions then use the money as they see fit to "save" themselves. Is this a fault of the politicians that the private industries didn't spend the money the way the politicians and/or the american citizens see fit. Or is it the fault of the private industries that were in control of the money?
Guess this means that the next bailout/stimulus funds shouldn't be put in the hands of private corporations right?
later:
One of the key reasons why infrastructure gets neglected, in the first place, is that there is very little political pay-off to filling potholes and repairing bridges, compared to spending that same money creating community centers, bike paths and other things
indeed- but even if the money is spent on community centers and bike paths, that is still spending that goes out to the people and creates jobs (unlike what we have seen transpire from tarp so far).
From there sowell rehashes old arguments of the speed of bureaucracy, but as i said before- there is no alternative presented by him or by the free market at this point.