HN user

watchandwait

1,184 karma
Posts4
Comments140
View on HN

What's missing are the jobs lost in other parts of the economy, because govt stimulus is basically a transfer of resources from existing private businesses. In other words, do we really think taxing Google, filtering the money through Congress and the lobbying machine, and providing those funds to a politically favored roads project is really a net jobs creator for the economy?

Your post is too partisan and too cynical. This was a good day, and the system worked.

Of course Congress will hold hearings and some will complain loudly-- it is a controversial and major decision-- but there is no mechanism for Congress to overturn this action...it is up to the courts, the law, and the economists, as designed.

Stupid scientists 15 years ago

In 2011, the the U.S. government will spend more money directly bailing out Fannie Mae than it will spend on NASA's entire budget.

How, exactly, do you propose "paying it back"? Social Security is already a TERRIBLE deal for current workers. The only options are to either limit benefits to retirees, who are already getting more than they paid in (payroll taxes are higher now than they were before 1983), or to make Social Security an even worse deal by taxing current workers even more.

There has been a complete lack of leadership from the Congressional Democrats on this issue. They haven't produced a budget plan in nearly three years, while borrowing 40 cents of every dollar spent during that time.

I'm not a partisan-- George Bush's runaway spending contributed a great deal to the current predicament. But the basic Congressional oversight and operating under a budget hasn't happened the last couple of years.

Japan is a nation of savers and has a massive domestic pool of savings. Also, Japan will drop below investment grade within the next ten years as those savers retire.

America, on the other hand, needs to borrow internationally.

Social Security is supposed to be a pension program, not an income redistribution program. So you are making "contributions", not paying taxes, in the official lingo.

Of course the program is most regressive for younger workers, who pay the most and will get the least in return.

Social Security is in serious trouble, by the way, although it is not the driver of the current budget crisis. In just a couple of years the program goes into the red, and increasingly so as more boomers retire. The unfunded liability is around $8 trillion. That's serious money.

America is exceptional, just read the founding documents, there's been nothing like the American experiment in liberty before or since. That freedom resulted in unprecedented prosperity and innovation. The Tea Party movement seeks to restore that, and their plan of budget austerity is the only path forward. The other way-- profligate spending and stimulus-- is the path that Japan took and it failed.

There's no strategy in Washington. Indeed, policy chaos caused by sweeping changes (both proposed and enacted) in health care, energy, financial, tax, and union rules have wrecked private business planning. America is being run like a banana republic, borrowing over 40% of its spending budget, randomly intervening in industries like auto, banking, and housing to reward political allies, and operating on a week-to-week horizon.

The self-dealing by the banks since 2008 has been almost wholly underwritten by the Fed and the Treasury. Beyond TARP there are myriad guarantees, lending programs, and regulatory exemptions, all designed to provide the banks with greater profit and allowing them to offload risk, usually to the Fed or the taxpayer. Indeed, if you look closely, much of the "profit" in the banking system today is coming from banks borrowing at Fed subsidized rates and lending that money back to the U.S. government.

This isn't true. Auto drivers pay more than their fair share for the roads-- the gas tax actually also subsidizes some passenger rail and other forms of transportation.

Again, just because heavy trucks pay extra taxes doesn't mean that they cover their impact on the road system.

"Passenger vehicles account for 93 percent of all vehicle miles traveled on public roads in the United States. While large trucks account for just 7 percent of the miles traveled, they account for the most damage to the infrastructure."

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/otps/costallocation.htm

If you are going to engage in name-calling, at least cite a source. There are multiple studies that show that heavy trucks destroy roads and bridges (one truck causes 9,600 times more wear than a car) and also that heavy trucks are disproportionately dangerous, killing about 5,000 people a year.

The point is that heavy trucks don't pay enough taxes to cover their actual impact on the road-system.

The truck driver and his company is also exploiting the highway "commons" and passing most of the costs on you, the auto driver. Almost all damage and wear on U.S. roads comes from heavy trucks, and the gas taxes paid by truckers come nowhere near covering the cost they inflict on the highway system. So next time you are stuck in traffic in a construction zone, you can thank the big rigs.