Skip to main content

Coyote does the unthinkable ...

... which is deal with real economic data:

One problem with the stimulus bill is that it is so diffuse, so poorly understood, and so impossible to measure, that it will allow its supporters to claim anything about its effects. If no one knows what is in it, how do you measure effectiveness? Long recession? Those dang Republicans slowed the bill and kept the size too low. End of 2009 recovery? It’s because of the stimulus bill (never mind that the money will not have even really been spent). So, in the interests of setting a reasonable baseline, here is the pre-stimulus economic projections:




He then includes a comparison of ecnomic indicators now and in the early 1980s:



Back then, we responded with tax cuts and a focus by the President on reducing the size of government. Twenty-five years of prosperity followed. Today we are responding with a trillion dollars of money for government bureaucrats, increases in welfare, and pork for favored corporations. I am not hugely confident.


So the question, when evaluating the effectiveness of the stimulus package, is not whether the indicators go up, but whether the uptick exceeds that which the Philadelphia Federal Reserve predicted without any government action at all.

Once again, this disclaimer: I am not advocating a policy of complete government inaction (and if you want to know what I have advocated, go back and read it), but I am advocating for a bit more sophisticated dialogue over economics and modeling than we are currently being treated to by the likes of Paul Krugman and many of our liberal/progressive friends.

Comments

Tyler Nixon said…
a bit more sophisticated dialogue over economics and modeling than we are currently being treated to by the likes of Paul Krugman and many of our liberal/progressive friends.

It's good to see you too can be a dreamer, Steve.

Detailed or sophisticated discussion is politically counterproductive to stimulus steamroll mania, dont ya know.

Keep 'em all scared, ignorant, off-guard, dazzled...whatever it takes....and you can sell them anything, pretending all along it's either what they want or what's best for them, whether they know it or not.
Anonymous said…
Why pick 1981 as the base year for comparison. How about 1991? Obviously there is an agenda here!

Perry Hood
Anonymous said…
Moreover, check out the Federal Reserve of Phila -- their predictions have been pretty far off.

http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/real-time-center/survey-of-professional-forecasters/2009/survq109.cfm

(h/t: bbartlog)

Perry Hood
tom said…
"Why pick 1981 as the base year for comparison. How about 1991? Obviously there is an agenda here!"

yeah. why would anyone pick the most recent major recession as a basis for comparison. must be an agenda ;-)

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...