Criticism without construction isn’t all that useful. I’m a big critic of the stimulus program because it will be a huge drain on our national finances for many years to come. But if we must deficit-spend our way out of the economic mess we’re in, I think that maybe this is a better way to go about doing it.
As the video from Cato I posted last night points out, government spending is very rarely the answer. But if you insist that we need to deficit-spend our way out of the current economic mess, Reynolds’ proposal is certainly better at incentivizing job creation than what’s working its way through Congress now.
And if you really look into what’s actually in the proposed stimulus bill, it seems there’s a lot less infrastructure purchases and upgrades than is being used to sell it — and a lot more bureaucracy and welfare. And nearly seven-eighths of it won’t be spent until 2010, which seems to defeat the purpose of stimulating the economy right now. And there are precious few tax cuts and no spending cuts at all. The President, as my “quote of the moment” shows, is not following through on his campaign promise to create a net spending cut at all.
This is as ill-thought out a response to a difficult and sudden situation as the PATRIOT Act was to a national security emergency. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a tax cut (permanent or temporary) instead of simply printing more money.
