Tuesday, October 06, 2009
The bizarro logic of stimulus spending
From a political standpoint, Canadians prime minister Stephen Harper, as well as American president Barack Obama, seem to have suffered diverging fates in relation to the stimulus packages they passed early this year.
In Canada, you can't find many critics of the stimulus package. It's generally seen as a needed measure to help the economy along during very rough times.
In the United States, however, you can indeed find many stimulus package critics. It's seen as awfully expensive and counterproductive, especially from a fiscally conservative standpoint.
Now, as much as I applaud the Harper Conservatives for their political skills in giving Canadians and/or potential critics what they apparently want, I really can't say that I see the logic of stimulus spending. In fact, any of the logic that it contains seems to be more of the bizarro variety than one based on the real world events. Why is that?
Well, it's because stimulus spending doesn't stimulate. Simple. On both sides of the border, most of the spending isn't supposed to take effect until next year. How in the world is that supposed to stimulate an economy in recession when it's needed most, which was supposed to be months ago, right?
So, if someone can tell me what exactly is the worth of this stimulus spending, I'd be much obliged. Because it doesn't seem to do what it's supposed to do. So, what exactly does it do?