Comments on: It’s For The Children! http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/ The repository of one hard-boiled egg from the south suburbs of Milwaukee, Wisconsin (and the occassional guest-blogger). The ramblings within may or may not offend, shock and awe you, but they are what I (or my guest-bloggers) think. Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:40:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Shoebox http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36909 Shoebox Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:13:55 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36909 abstruse - see also "economic theory" abstruse – see also “economic theory”

]]> By: dad29 http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36906 dad29 Sun, 11 Jan 2009 14:31:36 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36906 Very interesting read; thanks for the link-fix. Also VERY abstruse number-crunching in there. Very interesting read; thanks for the link-fix.

Also VERY abstruse number-crunching in there.

]]> By: steveegg http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36904 steveegg Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:32:52 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36904 Try <a href="http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/tags/Greg+Mankiw/default.aspx" rel="nofollow">this</a>. It works for me. Try this. It works for me.

]]> By: dad29 http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36903 dad29 Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:12:01 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36903 That mankiw link doesn't work. That mankiw link doesn’t work.

]]> By: Shoebox http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36900 Shoebox Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:02:22 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36900 Your analogy is incorrect. The correct analogy would be the decision to enter Iraq. One that did receive a considerable amount of debate and which nearly every Dem who voted for it claimed some sort of duping or amnesia subsequently....funny, lots of the same folks who now claim omniscience for fixing the economy....but that's really a separate topic. You may wish to read the following: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/tags/Greg+Mankiw/default.aspx In fact, the multipliers for government spending are found to be amongst the least efficient. It's really not hard to figure out when you consider that when govt. spends they are trying to force fit "investement" to fit what they want the world to look like i.e. they don't have to justify it with a return, whereas if you let individuals or companies do it, they will make economically valued decisions. The other problem is that the only way that govt "invests" is to take those investment $ from another source i.e. taxing, borrowing etc. Even Obama's newly appointed Chair of the Economic Council, I think much to her surprise, sees that taxes, increasing or decreasing, have a much larger impact on GDP than any form of direct govt. "stimulation." Your analogy is incorrect. The correct analogy would be the decision to enter Iraq. One that did receive a considerable amount of debate and which nearly every Dem who voted for it claimed some sort of duping or amnesia subsequently….funny, lots of the same folks who now claim omniscience for fixing the economy….but that’s really a separate topic.

You may wish to read the following: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/tags/Greg+Mankiw/default.aspx In fact, the multipliers for government spending are found to be amongst the least efficient. It’s really not hard to figure out when you consider that when govt. spends they are trying to force fit “investement” to fit what they want the world to look like i.e. they don’t have to justify it with a return, whereas if you let individuals or companies do it, they will make economically valued decisions. The other problem is that the only way that govt “invests” is to take those investment $ from another source i.e. taxing, borrowing etc. Even Obama’s newly appointed Chair of the Economic Council, I think much to her surprise, sees that taxes, increasing or decreasing, have a much larger impact on GDP than any form of direct govt. “stimulation.”

]]> By: scott http://norunnyeggs.com/2009/01/its-for-the-children/comment-page-1/#comment-36898 scott Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:09:19 +0000 http://norunnyeggs.com/?p=4364#comment-36898 <i>I've always been skeptical of the "don't ask questions, just do as I say approach." </i> This no doubt explains why you spoke out against Bush's spying, secret prisons and torture regimes. Me, there's only one aspect of the stimulation plan that I am definitely for: increased government spending on necessary infrastructure. I heard a very smart economist this morning explain to me that a) this (WWII) was what truly ended the great depression and b) that one gets a bigger bang out of this kind of government spending (+$2 GDP for every $1 you spend) than you do with, say, tax cuts (+$1.25 for every $1 you spend). Business tax cuts? Even middle-class tax cuts? I'd love to talk about those things later, but I'm convinced they should be a part of the stimulus package. I’ve always been skeptical of the "don’t ask questions, just do as I say approach."

This no doubt explains why you spoke out against Bush’s spying, secret prisons and torture regimes.

Me, there’s only one aspect of the stimulation plan that I am definitely for: increased government spending on necessary infrastructure. I heard a very smart economist this morning explain to me that a) this (WWII) was what truly ended the great depression and b) that one gets a bigger bang out of this kind of government spending (+$2 GDP for every $1 you spend) than you do with, say, tax cuts (+$1.25 for every $1 you spend). Business tax cuts? Even middle-class tax cuts? I’d love to talk about those things later, but I’m convinced they should be a part of the stimulus package.

]]>