Touche, and if I remember my history correctly we ended the Great Depression by our massive expenditures during WW2. It would appear that a lot of money (and blood) does indeed put out fires. Since I’m not in the mood for WW3, how about we give some big sacks of money a try first? Who the heck cares if the money is stamped: “made in China”? Just don’t let your kids chew on the bills….

Peace.
Rick

I like your ideas, and strongly suggest that you talk to your representatives about it!

As for your degree in history, what was your specialty? I am guessing that you did not specialize in the economic policies of the Great Depression? I sure as heck didn’t, but thank goodness for libraries and the internet! There are a number of articles and books on the time frame, and I find it intriguing at how similar the debates were during that time frame.

But to answer your criticism directly, the Cash for Clunkers does not necessarily provide long term stimulus for the economy, but from a manufacturing perspective, it clears out a lot of old inventory (in a lot of respects). It is my sincere hope that it allows the auto industry a clean slate so that they can compete again. Whether they will take the money and reinvest in their work force and their products remains to be seen, but I hope they will (the cynic in me says we will hear about big bonuses paid….)

However, the CfC is but one of the first elements of the Stimulus Plan with longer term solutions still set to happen. It is like looking at the neighbor who turned on his little garden hose, and ignoring the multitude of Fire Trucks all coming up the street (my neighbor’s house burned a couple of months ago, hence the analogy (no on was hurt)). This is a “cumulative” fight, and picking apart every element and viewing it in a vacuum will end up with a lot of cut and pasted comments.

This is a great program doing exactly what it was supposed to do (try to save our manufacturing industries).

Peace.
Rick Beagle

You said, “Are you someone helping the situation by hooking up hoses, providing a meal, a warm blanket, and shelter, or are you sitting in the background making a fuss about how much water we are using? I do not disagree that we are spending a great deal of money, but historically, this is the right course of action over the long view.”

As someone who has a degree in history I can tell you that this is not proven by history. And I am definitely not a Republican either. The cash for clunkers program, as are most of the other approaches being used now are counter productive. They make things worse in the long term for the benefit of what looks like short term gain (although even in the short term getting people to buy what they cannot afford is not wise and the affect of the current financial situation has only brought people from negative savings to saving 7% which is still not adequate). Both political parties act in such ways for their own political goals, not for the good of the country, although probably from lack of competence rather than evil motives.

There are many things that could and should be done which would really help. All of them would relate to making the country more productive so that people could buy out of their abundance, not through going into great debt to buy what they cannot afford.

For example, how about extending unemployment plus financial aid to unemployed people who go to school to learn one of the trades that are vastly short of workers. Even with the unemployment situation today there are vast numbers of jobs with no applicants.

There is a growing shortage of nurses for example that is even now leaving many elderly and disabled not getting the services they need because there is no one to work. I have had to deal with this personally because we have a handicapped son and have spent many a night caring for him and going without sleep just because none of the nursing services can find enough help.

Just because people don’t want to throw gasoline on the burning house doesn’t mean they do not want to help put out the fire.

So, two (unwarranted) wars, tax decreases for the wealthiest, deregulation, unwinding of depression era finance laws, and the expansion of the federal government under Republican rule was focusing on the macroeconomics and it didn’t drive up a debt, crash the US economy, or let big business make a mockery of our laws? Don’t even get me started at the state and local level.

We are on the ledge of a depression and to the Democrats credit they did exactly what worked before. The insane part of this story, the Republicans complaints in the 1930’s were exactly the same as they are today. At least someone learned from history, but not the folks on this site apparently….

I am a fiscally conservative Democrat, and I am sure that surprises you, so let me paint you an analogy to illustrate my support on this issue. The house is on fire. Are you someone helping the situation by hooking up hoses, providing a meal, a warm blanket, and shelter, or are you sitting in the background making a fuss about how much water we are using? I do not disagree that we are spending a great deal of money, but historically, this is the right course of action over the long view.

Peace.
Rick Beagle

Buying things we cannot afford is what produced this depression. This so called stimulus is not designed to improve the economy by stimulating new production and wealth to make reasonable purchases valid. Instead it entices people who had started to save a little into getting into more debt. So it is not good for them.

But in the end what is even worse is that the government is not giving anybody anything. It is borrowing money it doesn’t have and lending it to us. Of course some people get the money while all of us have to pay it back with interest. You and I and everyone else who did not get a car will still have to help pay for this program as the money is leached out of the economy to pay that money back with interest.

Washington is focused on micro-economics instead of macro-economics. Is is contributing to a tragic economic future rather than a productive one. Fortunately we can individually choose to do better for ourselves by listening to the good advice we learn from this source and others, but we all could do so much better without these poor decisions by the government.