|
Edited on Fri Jan-29-10 08:47 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
Anyone who has read my posts knows that I consider a "lost decade" to still be at least a 50-50 proposition, see no growth on the horizon about to reduce unemployment to morally acceptable levels and favor dramatic action on the economy and employment.
My proposals are usually leftist, but my concern in practical not idealogical. It's just that leftist solutions work better for less money.
I think the incoming administration had an opportunity and obligation to change the political playing field on the economy and the deficit, but it was not to be. Okay... no point crying over spilled milk.
So, given the realities that face (no spending, pugs running everything with their mighty 41-59 majority, president playing deficit politics...) us what can be done?
Easy. A two trillion dollar tax cut; half 2009, half 2010. Whatever percentage that works out to with income under $100,000 receiving twice the cut.
Could that get through Congress? Yes.
Is it a better plan than whatever we are actually going to do? Yes. (Not because it is smart but because it is huge... smart AND huge doesn't seem to be a poltical option and huge is more important.)
Would it reduce unemployment and offer the hope of a meaningful jump-start to the sort of growth we need to even begin to repair the damage that has been done? Yes. It would be a lot more expensive than smarter things but those are smarter things that aren't going to happen.
It is not optimal. It isn't what I would prefer. I can think of 100 better approaches but not one of the would get through congress in today's absurd environment. We could probably get the same effect with 50-60% the money in the form of targeted spending, but that isn't going to happen.
So it is the right thing to do because it is the only politically viable BIG move.
So just how "grown up" are we? After all the lectures about realism and bipartisanship are we prepared to follow the only option we have left ourselves?
|