Comments for Are Republicans Balking at Stimulus in an Election Year Because They Want to Raise Unemployment? at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 10 out of 10 comments http://www.cepr.net Wed, 22 May 2013 09:24:50 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1238 [i]I happen to favor a CCC or WPA approach of direct hiring and training by the federal government, especially since another idea, a FICA holiday, wouldn't help the unemployed at all. [/i] A 3rd idea would be to send every citizen a check. Of course if you need a road, bridge or whatever now is a great time to build it because wages are down, interest rates for the fed Gov are down and there is less crowding out. CCC or WPA requires overseers. - floccina Wed, 30 Jun 2010 05:17:21 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1234 "I have no idea why they've taken this tack unless it's to pander to what they perceive to be the preferences of the majority of their readers - investors, bond holders and top income earners." The irony is that investors, bond holders, and top income earners stand on the shoulders of the successful FDR and LBJ middle class. With each redistribution of income upwards and tax, pension, and risk burden downward, the platform becomes more and more shakey. These are the real tea bags, not the lunatic fringe we see on the evening news. The Reagan/Bush libertarian fools who think their good fortune is a result of devine intervention or natural selection. I feel so much better that another small town cowboy hick from Wyoming, Alan Simpson, joins with Dick Cheney in determining the course of America's future. - zinc Wed, 30 Jun 2010 02:00:07 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1231 Dean does not seem to be arguing for or against the tactics the Republicans are using to increase their chances of winning congressional seats this fall, i.e., delay, obstruction, and a new-found concern about federal deficits. His point is the Post's terminology in reporting on the reasons that efforts to pass the unemployment extension has repeatedly failed - especially the Post's use of the term "sky-high spending," which is the paper's own terminology. Also the Post makes no effort to attribute the Republicans' continued objection to the bill as possibly politically motivated. We can argue here about the best ways to approach the unemployment problem and the multiplier effects of one or another way of getting money into the hands of people so they can spend it and thereby create demand - I happen to favor a CCC or WPA approach of direct hiring and training by the federal government, especially since another idea, a FICA holiday, wouldn't help the unemployed at all. But it's difficult to argue that the Post's reporting is skewed, however covertly, toward deficit reduction and austerity measures rather than further stimulus spending, and the paper seems to have an aversion to reporting on the Republicans' political tactics. I have no idea why they've taken this tack unless it's to pander to what they perceive to be the preferences of the majority of their readers - investors, bond holders and top income earners. - Queen of Sheba Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:31:19 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1230 If you were out of power and your opponent was doing something that could make you lose, it would be a rational choice to thwart your opponents' strategy for winning. The Marxist analysis suggests that capitalism is running out of profitable investment opportunities. Thus, privatization (already a long and slow process) will provide new investment opportunities. Large deficits are the key to privatization because budget deficits justify further "austerity measures." - thomas Tue, 29 Jun 2010 10:30:29 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1229 BTW why don't the Democrats do a FICA holiday. That seems like the best stimulus possible and is widely supported by economists. They will not do it because they think that it would hurt the Democratic party's long term prospects. Were more money for teachers and planned parenthood, big democratic party supporters, will help. - floccina Tue, 29 Jun 2010 10:22:33 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1228 I would not put it past them nor the Democrats if it was the other way around. You got lie a lot to get elected. - floccina Tue, 29 Jun 2010 10:16:58 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1227 Dean, I normally agree with your analysis, but this headline was cheap - equally well you could ask: Are Democrats Wanting Stimulus in an Election Year Because They Want Lower Unemployment Until November? - Peter T Tue, 29 Jun 2010 07:36:22 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1226 Don't know why dems don't force a filibuster - let the country see the party of No in action. We all know there is Pork but extending unemployment benefits isn't one of those - scottinnj Tue, 29 Jun 2010 06:14:01 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1225 If times are bad, the party in power loses. The Democrats are the party theoretically in power, but they're letting the Republicans use holds and the filibuster to control the show. The Republicans are doing what you'd expect, but why are the Democrats being so passive. - John Emerson Tue, 29 Jun 2010 04:51:48 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/are-republicans-balking-at-stimulus-in-an-election-year-because-they-want-to-raise-unemployment#comment-1222 [quote]... it is also possible that they oppose these measures because they feel they would gain politically in November from seeing them voted down.[/quote] Another sign of a backward upside down world, the Rush Limbaugh "we hope it fails" drumbeat because we know it could succeed. Crime has increased so there needs to be more funding for police on the street, but let's not fund it due to the excess debt, and push tax reductions instead to get elected on the claim that this will generate enough tax revenue to fund more police. Then we can say they failed for allowing too much crime. Stupid liberals. - izzatzo Tue, 29 Jun 2010 01:47:58 +0100