Stimulate me?! No thanks. Try this instead...

from JoeUser Forums

Here's that article I was trying to remember to write.  At least I remembered the topic, so I can get this complete thought out of my brain. ;)

There's talk once again that the economy is in need of more stimulation.  Hey, I'm no prude and the thought of stimulation is actually appealing to me, or at least it would be if the stimulation is appropriate.

The thing is, I really don't believe that I'm one of the ones that needs stimulation.  Sure I'd like to have some $$ to spend on something, or perhaps to pay down some of my own debt but therein lies part of the problem.  The last time the government gave us free money (which I still suspect isn't even close to 'free' for me, and will likely mean the income tax refund that I should get won't be there because the government will say they already gave me that money as part of the stimulus package :() many of us paid off debts and didn't spend the money like the government hoped we would.

Now I did the best I could to meet the demands the government placed upon me.  I spent what I could, bought some toys for me and my family.  I may have put a little of the money towards debt reduction, but I think most was blown on things that should have helped stimulate retail sales at Wally world and other similar places.  (Apparently not enough spent at places like Tweeter -- soon to be out of business -- and Circuit City in select locations -- also soon to be out of business in those select locations.  And oh, yeah, though I tried to do my best to keep my local Bennigan's restaurant in business apparently I failed at that as they closed all of their company owned locations back in the early summer :()

I probably said back at the time that the idea of the stimulus package that had been passed was somewhat stupid.  Not that I don't appreciate found money, and the idea of spending it to buy a flat screen TV was cool and all, but there are still better things to spend money on that would provide much more benefits to the vast majority of citizens.

I'm sure some of my friends and regular readers would take offense, yet again, that I would suggest something that actually sounds more like it would be coming from the Obama/socialistic camp, but I'm going to say it again: if we want to stimulate the economy and get real benefit from it, then we need to spend money on something that returns long term benefits.  Don't send payments to individuals and families, but instead start spending some money on improving the infrastructure in this country.  Fix our bridges and roadways.  Add lanes to improve traffic flow and reduce traffic congestion and help eliminate the negative impacts from all of that congestion (smog and the like).

Take money and spend it on building a few government built power generation plants.  Big ones.  Big enough to power some very significant portions of the power needs for this country.   After they're built, auction 'em off to private industry with some serious restrictions on the sale that would preclude the facility from being shutdown unnecessarily and would also require (if desired) retiring and/or refurbishing older facilities so that the environmental impact would see benefit, but at the same time make sure that the power generating capacity is improved overall.

Rather than bribing voters that aren't going to vote for another two years, pay us all real benefits by actually making longer term improvements with the money that the congress critters are going to insist on spending.  If done right it should result in construction jobs, engineering jobs, accounting jobs, etc., and hopefully some of those jobs will remain once the economy gets moving again.

967 views 3 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

I disagree with the whole premise.  It is not found money, it is our money.  I dont have a problem spending more on infrastructure, but they have enough for that already.  Just stop the income transfers.  I dont need to see the rib eyes at the checkout counter (when I am buying Chicken) to know that the transfers are not going to starving people.

Reply #2 from Stardock Forums Top

I dont have a problem spending more on infrastructure, but they have enough for that already.
End of quote

I don't like disagreeing with you, but you've said that before and I don't believe -- at least in this case -- that is true.

The transportation trust fund is not nearly as flush as it should be with funds.  Far from it.  And the conserving of fuel and reduction in driving that many U.S. citizens have done over the last several months hasn't helped improve that situation as gasoline taxes pretty much depend upon fuel consumption to get money in.

The truth of the matter is that your state, and my state, and many others need far more road work than the current federal bank account can support paying for.  Our roadways are in poor shape and putting more patches down to fix the last 12 round of patches that were put down isn't going to fix it.  We need more lanes on our roads, new surfaces on existing roads, and additional bridges to connect some locations to others (and I'm not talking about bridges to no where in Alaska).

Saying that the government has enough money ignores inflation, ignores the lack of income to the transportation trust fund, and general ignores the amount of work we really -- fairly desperately -- need to have done and be doing.

The same holds for our power needs, though in that area I would agree that private industry should be stepping up to the plate and doing more.  That said, I know that a big part of the reason nothing has been done is because state and local governments have interfered and stopped building of such things because the NIMBY crowd can't stand to have such things built in their neighborhoods.  There are so many impediments to getting plants built that I can hardly blame private industry for just putting up their hands and saying PASS.

Which is why I come back to saying that the government (federal) should step in, eliminate as many of the impediments as possible, build the damned plants and transfer them -- with just a few restrictions that preclude dirty tricks being played by the companies that receive 'em -- to private industry so that the government can get out of the way and let industry work as it should (free of the burdens that otherwise would be placed upon them by the local governments and state governments).

Galactic Civilizations III
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

The transportation trust fund is not nearly as flush as it should be with funds.
End of quote

There is no such thing as a trust fund in DC.  QUite simply it is a shell game.  They say this dollar is for the trust fund, so we take that dollar and use if for some pork barrel.  I work in state government.  They passed the lottery law on the basis that all monies went to schools.  Guess what?  They reduced general expenditures by the amoutn the lottery brought in.

There is more than enough money is DC to fund infrastructure changes.