Skip to main content

View Diary: Stimulus and Brewster's Trillions (14 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I take a broader view of government stimulus (0+ / 0-)

    spending.  All deficit spending falls into the category for me.  Doesn't mean that it's effective or even intended to stimulate the economy, but if we follow the money, all deficit spending has some stimulative effect.  The TARP money is refunding the banksters for the cost of the housing bubble that propped up the economy for seven years.  The deficit spending to fight the wars, props up arms manufacturers and military service companies.  Neither are cost efficient economic stimuli but it's incorrect not the see that they stimulated certain sectors of the US economy.  

    What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

    by Marie on Tue Jan 13, 2009 at 12:02:56 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  interesting and totally of the moment (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I see where you are coming from. and in this particular case, you are probably close to the truth.  

      Taking the common view the big banks were bankrupt and their failure would have thrown our economy into a immediate depression,  TARP funds counts as something like stimulus.  However, it does not really stimulate the economy in that it makes businesses and people more likely to spend/consume/invest/get on with economic life.  With some of those funds, we are supposed to get the money back.  

      I think that Hank Paulson has made a huge investment to protect wall street, money manager capitalism.  This was not in the best interests of the united states.  We now have something we needed to avoid - Japan-like Zombie Banks.

      Like the tag line about FDR and GWB.  Know that OHB is going to be awesome!

      I am repeating myself, and thats ok.

      by mickslam on Tue Jan 13, 2009 at 03:59:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site