<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Citizen Economists &#187; stimulus plan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/tag/stimulus-plan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs</link>
	<description>Citizen Economists is an online economics magazine written by citizen journalists. These ordinary citizens provide reports and commentary on the current events affecting the economics of the fields they work in.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:10:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Bad News Bears Battle Break-Neck Bounce</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/10/20/bad-news-bears-battle-break-neck-bounce/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/10/20/bad-news-bears-battle-break-neck-bounce/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:59:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eldon Mast</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entrepreneurs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stimulus plan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=2181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p> </p> <p>Phrases like dead-cat bounce, house of cards, stagflation, W-shaped, U-shaped, lackluster, sucker&#8217;s rally, deflation spiral, run-away inflation, and great depression were all in their pronouncements.</p> <p>The bad news bears have pointed to a fearful, unemployed consumer who has cut up her credit card, has no more savings, and a government that has <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/10/20/bad-news-bears-battle-break-neck-bounce/">Bad News Bears Battle Break-Neck Bounce</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/eCeeVU3xaGxT4rlWxF7akA8hORM/0/da"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/af126_di" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/eCeeVU3xaGxT4rlWxF7akA8hORM/1/da"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/af126_di" border="0" alt="" /></a></p>
<p>Phrases like dead-cat bounce, house of cards, stagflation, W-shaped, U-shaped, lackluster, sucker&#8217;s rally, deflation spiral, run-away inflation, and great depression were all in their pronouncements.</p>
<p>The bad news bears have pointed to a fearful, unemployed consumer who has cut up her credit card, has no more savings, and a government that has only racked up more national debt &#8212; the dollar is dead &#8212; they claim.</p>
<p>But the <a href="http://mast-economy.blogspot.com/2009/10/q3-earning-season-underscores-rebound.html">Q3 business realities</a> continue to paint a starkly different picture.</p>
<p><a href="http://mast-economy.blogspot.com/2009/02/stimulus-as-good-as-it-gets.html">Stimulus programs</a> are firing up.  Inflation is under control.  Manufacturing lines are back on-line.  Equities are on a roll.  <a href="http://mast-economy.blogspot.com/2009/09/confidence-spike-consumers-small.html">Optimism is accelerating</a>.</p>
<p>So what are the doomsters missing?</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s what Barton Briggs (Managing Partner of Traxis Partners Investment Fund) <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/218237/page/1">writes in Newsweek</a>:</p>
<p>&#8220;First and foremost, they are betting against America, the greatest entrepreneurial engine ever created. History says buy America when it&#8217;s down. In addition, emerging economies may well be the new dynamo of growth. They now account for 35 percent of world GDP and are growing two to three times faster than the developed world. S&amp;P 500 companies now collect almost 50 percent of their revenues from overseas, and almost half of that portion comes from these fast-growing developing countries. Another factor could be that stocks currently despite the rally are still deeply undervalued. The rule of thumb is that stocks should sell at a price/earnings ratio equal to 20 less the inflation rate. Assume S&amp;P 500 operating earnings are $70 to $75 next year and inflation is 1 percent, you get a theoretical price far higher than the current level of 1060.&#8221;</p>
<p>Not only will the second half of <a href="http://mast-economy.blogspot.com/2009/08/second-half-growth-coming-on-strong.html">2009 continue to be strong</a>, but 2010 will likely reap the benefits of this new international growth dynamo.  It will be interesting to see where and when the dead cat lands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/10/20/bad-news-bears-battle-break-neck-bounce/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spending Is Not Stimulus President Obama</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/02/25/spending-is-not-stimulus-president-obama/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/02/25/spending-is-not-stimulus-president-obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Thersites</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics and Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stimulus plan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Amid cheers, President Obama showed his true colors when it comes to his plan to deal with the recession (soon to be a depression). Valiantly fighting off all takers on his stimulus, Mr. Obama exclaimed,</p> <p>&#8220;Then there&#8217;s the argument, well, this is full of pet projects. When was the last time that we saw <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/02/25/spending-is-not-stimulus-president-obama/">Spending Is Not Stimulus President Obama</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amid cheers, President Obama showed his true colors when it comes to his plan to deal with the recession (soon to be a depression).  Valiantly fighting off all takers on his stimulus, Mr. Obama exclaimed,</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Then there&#8217;s the argument, well, this is full of pet projects.  When was the last time that we saw a bill of this magnitude move out with no earmarks in it?  Not one.  (Applause.)  And when you start asking, well, what is it exactly that is such a problem that you&#8217;re seeing, where&#8217;s all this waste and spending?  Well, you know, you want to replace the federal fleet with hybrid cars.  Well, why wouldn&#8217;t we want to do that?  (Laughter.) That creates jobs for people who make those cars.  It saves the federal government energy.  It saves the taxpayers energy.  (Applause.) So then you get the argument, well, this is not a stimulus bill, this is a spending bill.  What do you think a stimulus is?  (Laughter and applause.) That&#8217;s the whole point.  No, seriously. (Laughter.)  That&#8217;s the point. (Applause.)&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Now I understand that President Obama was speaking in front of a group of Democrats, trying to rally his comrades, but this type of message should outrage American citizens.  Mr. Obama promised the people change, yet he makes the argument that since there are always earmarks in bills, the government should get a free pass for porking up its latest monstrosity.   Apologies to the already suffering American people that have to pay for this.</p>
<p>When it comes to buying a new fleet of green cars, the true politician in Obama comes out, spinning this ridiculous confiscation of private money as creating jobs.  If this creates jobs, why doesn&#8217;t the government buy every taxpayer a Prius?  Why not throw in some solar panels for every taxpayer too?  Because this money has to come from somewhere of course.  This is a textbook example of the broken window fallacy in action.  Basically, Obama will be taking taxpayers&#8217; money and transferring it to the auto sector.  All of the taxpayers are going to be subsidizing one particular industry.  One interest gains at the cost of all others.  This is what American democracy has become.  It is not about the public good; it is about the good of a specific set of interests.</p>
<p>As to Mr. Obama&#8217;s final point that spending bills and stimulus are synonymous, one has to wonder how much longer this country will be able to stay afloat.  Can Mr. Obama explain how taking $800 billion or most likely more money out of the private sector, and using some of it for pork, some for income redistribution and the rest for &#8220;shovel-ready&#8221; projects is stimulative?  Can Paul Krugman or Larry Summers point to a situation in which wealth taken from the hands of the people has ever been used more productively by the government?  Government spending has NEVER &#8212; not once pushed an economy out of a recession or depression.  Even for those who acknowledge that the New Deal failed to bring us out of the Depression, most argue that it was only World War II that got the economy back rolling.  Yet even this is false, another example of the broken window fallacy that somehow you can mobilize all resources under a command economy, and by allowing the government to channel them towards specific uses (in the case of war, towards bombs and fighter planes) leave yourself better off.  As Robert Higgs <a href="http://www.independent.org/pdf/tir/tir_01_4_higgs.pdf" target="_blank">shows</a>, our productivity did not recover until after the war, when productive forces were released into the free market.  The government cannot plan our economy and allocate resources profitably.  Let me repeat this: THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT PLAN OUR ECONOMY AND ALLOCATE RESOURCES PROFITABLY.  Not in the Soviet Union, not in Nazi Germany, not in Cuba, not in the United States.  Even if I leave out the moral issue that people should have the right to choose how they use their money, productively or unproductively, and grant that somehow, some way, President Obama can spend the money as the people would, it is a proven fact that we are going to have to issue hundreds of billions of dollars in Treasuries to fund this.</p>
<p>As George Melloan <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123388703203755361.html" target="_blank">noted in the Wall Street Journal recently</a>, this will inevitably prove inflationary.  Our friends in China and Japan, already strapped for cash given their own economic problems will not be able to subsidize our profligacy much longer.  They might even sell some of their existing Treasury holdings to raise cash.  As has been noted repeatedly, Ben Bernanke may have to come in and buy Treasuries issued by his own government.  Quite a queer concept.  To carry out this plan, helicopter Ben will have to print up more dollars and thus we will see inflation in prices.  You can also bet that with the collapse in demand for treasuries abroad, and the government&#8217;s inflationary actions, interest rates will rise for all of us.  We will suffer from stagflation, and the government will have no way to pay for all of its entitlements without printing more money, generating more inflation and higher and higher interest rates.  We will be crushed under our own debt.  While the proper solution to all of this would be to allow ourselves as a nation to deleverage, paying off our debts and liquidating the bad assets, and forcing the government to reduce its spending and cut taxes, instead the President and the congress are sealing our fate to depression.  The above steps would be the true stimulus.  What the President proposes is no stimulus.  As the Wall Street Journal <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123292987008414041.html" target="_blank">quips</a>, &#8220;The spending portion of the stimulus, in short, isn&#8217;t really about the economy. It&#8217;s about promoting long-time Democratic policy goals, such as subsidizing health care for the middle class and promoting alternative energy. The &#8220;stimulus&#8221; is merely the mother of all political excuses to pack as much of this spending agenda as possible into a single bill when Mr. Obama is at his political zenith.&#8221;</p>
<p>One has to wonder if the reason Mr. Obama keeps telling us that things are going to get worse is intentional, a self-fulfilling prophecy.  Perhaps he knows the true history of the Depression, that the more the government intervened the worse things got.  He knows that this crisis will allow him to cement his place as President for at least eight years.  As is the government&#8217;s wont, it will exploit any situation to gain more power.</p>
<p>Every single citizen must realize that in allowing our representatives to pass this bill, we are dooming our children and our children&#8217;s children to pay for our mistakes, sacrificing our property without just compensation and allowing our representatives to further imperil our economy.  This is taxation without representation.  This is immorality.  This is the death knell of a once great nation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/02/25/spending-is-not-stimulus-president-obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Maximizing The Stimulus</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/01/29/maximizing-the-stimulus/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/01/29/maximizing-the-stimulus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan McLaughlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics and Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[counterfeit money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economic stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stimulus plan]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=440</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new type of stimulus would increase the demand most effectively <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/01/29/maximizing-the-stimulus/">Maximizing The Stimulus</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt"><span style="small;">“A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul”.<span style="yes"> </span>That quote was, interestingly enough, made by George Bernard Shaw, an avowed socialist.<span style="yes"> </span>It rings true for many of us because of what we see in every day experience.<span style="yes"> </span>Present day government is the formalization and enforcement of the business of robbing Peter to pay Paul.<span style="yes"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">Our current stimulus plan is one massive transfer from Peter to Paul.<span style="yes"> </span>The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is an amazing document.<span style="yes"> </span>It is 258 pages of funding opportunities, grants and programs totaling $825 billion, in addition to all of the previous and parallel efforts by the Treasury, Fed and FDIC.<span style="yes"> </span>It sounds like trick or treat time.<span style="yes"> </span>A billion for you, a few billion to you, and here, here’s an extra three and a quarter billion for you.<span style="yes"> </span>That’s mere pocket change when everyone is thinking in terms of trillions now.<span style="yes"> </span>However, if you own a casino or gaming organization, a swimming pool, aquarium, zoo or golf course, forget it.<span style="yes"> </span>You’re not eligible.<span style="yes"> </span>You have to find a different sugar daddy.<span style="yes"> </span>All other comers are welcome.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">Where is Peter in all of this?<span style="yes"> </span>Look in the mirror.<span style="yes"> </span>If you are a taxpayer, or if you use money, the value of which will be inflated away, or if you have children or grandchildren who will be footing the bill in the future, then say hi to Peter.<span style="yes"> </span>You are him.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">The stimulus plan injects mountains of previously non-existent cash into the economy, money that is made from nothing.<span style="yes"> </span>The idea is that, if you use enough money to “prime the pump”, the economy will start working on its own.<span style="yes"> </span>The problem is that the government has been priming the pump for decades.<span style="yes"> </span>The booms and busts are the result of constant priming.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">The underlying assumption behind the pump priming and the stimulation is that there is not enough demand for goods.<span style="yes"> </span>Our fearless leaders want to stimulate us to buy, even though we were being condemned for consumerism when it was convenient for them. <span style="yes"> </span>If our government really wants to stimulate our economy to the maximum amount, I have the foolproof solution.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt"><span style="small;">I propose that the government buy printing presses with official currency plates for every family in this country, the bigger the denominations the better.<span style="yes"> </span>That way, we, as consumers, wouldn’t have to wait for the banks to get stimulated in their own good time.<span style="yes"> </span>We wouldn’t have to wait for dinosaur car companies to have a miracle rebirth.<span style="yes"> </span>We each could stimulate our own economy.<span style="yes"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">Let’s say that printing presses would cost $10,000 each.<span style="yes"> </span>If we use a nice round number of 100 million family units in America, it would take a measly $1 trillion to forever solve the problem of not having enough demand.<span style="yes"> </span>Politicians could save all of the trillions of dollars of stimulus wasted by pouring them down the black hole they’re trying to fill now.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt"><span style="small;">People could print money for everything their heart desired.<span style="yes"> </span>They could dine at five star restaurants, drive luxury vehicles, live in huge mansions.<span style="yes"> </span>They would be able to support a level of demand reserved now only for politicians, bankers, mega corporate execs, lobbyists, United Nations representatives and environmentalists.<span style="yes"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt"><span style="small;">It is obviously preposterous to believe that everybody making their own money would stimulate the economy.<span style="yes"> </span>Nothing is produced by counterfeiting except dollar bills.<span style="yes"> </span>There is no productivity, no real wealth creation.<span style="yes"> </span>All that would result is a vast increase in worthless dollars.<span style="yes"> </span>In that case, the winner in the economy would be the one who could counterfeit the most, the one who inflates the money supply and devalues the dollar the most.<span style="yes"> </span>The losers are the ones who don’t counterfeit, or counterfeit the least.<span style="yes"> </span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">The reason that it is preposterous to believe that the stimulus will work when private citizens do it is precisely the same reason that it is preposterous for government to do it.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">The false stimulation may give some people profits, but those profits will come from the loss of purchasing power of the buying and tax paying public, not from the wealth creation process of free markets.<span style="yes"> </span>It is inevitable that there will be a large number of “stimulus multi-millionaires”, those who most efficiently rape the system and the taxpayer.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="0in 0in 0pt">The problem for investors these days will not be finding what industry or what business will be most productive, but rather, who will win the stimulation game.<span style="yes"> </span>Good luck, Peter, you’re going to need it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2009/01/29/maximizing-the-stimulus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

