The $800 Billion Gamble: Economists Say Stimulus Cuts Could Be "Disastrous"

[Joanne98]

The bill is all but passed, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't keep fighting to get something better. Here's another reminder of why (as if we needed it.)
Thomas B. Edsall at HuffPo reports:


The $800 Billion Gamble: Economists Say Stimulus Cuts Could Be "Disastrous"
...

The reaction to the changes adopted at the behest of a small but key group of "centrist" Senators -- Maine Republicans Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, Ben Nelson (D-NE) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) -- was strong.

Berkeley economist J. Bradford DeLong, who was a Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary during the Clinton administration:


"worse than the original bill...reduced rather than increased the bang-for-buck effectiveness of the bill.... Nelson and Collins, well, it's not clear what their objective is."
Jeffrey D. Sachs, Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development at Columbia (Mr. "shock therapy" in the 1990s):


"the Senate version is clearly worse: more tax cuts, less infrastructure, and less in transfers to state and local governments."
University of Texas economist James Galbraith:


"The behavior of the so-called bipartisan group has been outrageous.... The cutbacks to state aid have every potential of being disastrous. What they really reflect is the indifference of people who represent places like Nebraska and Maine to what goes on in New York or California."
Menzie D. Chinn, professor of Public Affairs and Economics at the University of Wisconsin:


"Cutting the transfers to the states seems particularly ill-advised, as we have a good feeling that the propensity to spend out these funds will be high and relatively quick."
Harry J. Holzer., Georgetown economist and former chief economist for the U.S. Department of Labor:

Continued>>
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=73608E704C2FC89AB1D6DF634E96B05D?diaryId=11485