I want to be optimistic. . .
. . .but I'm really struggling.
First watch economist Brian Wesbury discuss the President's budget here. As Wesbury explains so well "the bigger the government is - the more it takes of the private sector - the fewer jobs we have." We are headed in the wrong direction.
Second, read this from Bloomberg News:
"More than 7 out of 10 in the U.S. say the economy is mired in recession, and the country is conflicted over how to balance concerns over joblessness and the federal budget deficit, according to a Bloomberg National Poll.
Next, look at information dug up by Steve Layman (here) showing housing starts off.
I'll keep looking for a pony in this pile.
First watch economist Brian Wesbury discuss the President's budget here. As Wesbury explains so well "the bigger the government is - the more it takes of the private sector - the fewer jobs we have." We are headed in the wrong direction.
Second, read this from Bloomberg News:
"More than 7 out of 10 in the U.S. say the economy is mired in recession, and the country is conflicted over how to balance concerns over joblessness and the federal budget deficit, according to a Bloomberg National Poll.
Just like the experts, Americans are torn about whether the federal government should focus on curbing spending or creating jobs, the poll conducted July 9-12 shows. Seven of 10 Americans say reducing unemployment is the priority. At the same time, the public is skeptical of the Obama administration’s stimulus program and wary of more spending, with more than half saying the deficit is 'dangerously out of control.'"
7 out of 10 Americans believe that the economy is still in recession. Those people make lots of decisions.Next, look at information dug up by Steve Layman (here) showing housing starts off.
I'll keep looking for a pony in this pile.
"Just like the experts, Americans are torn about whether the federal government should focus on curbing spending or creating jobs."
To borrow a phrase from the liberals, that's a false choice. Many economic studies of countries all over the world show that the optimum amount of government spending (national, regional, and local) for economic growth is within a certain range of GDP. I forget the minimum. Say 15%. The maximum is 25%. Since combined federal, state, and local government spending is well over 25%, curbing spending would create jobs.
Reply to this
Re: my comment earlier today, here's the takeaway quote from the article I was thinking of:
"Most of the studies of the optimum size of government made by reputable scholars in recent decades have indicated that total government spending (federal plus state plus local) should be no lower than 17 percent, nor larger than about 30 percent of GDP. In a just completed paper, economists at the Institute for Market Economics in Sofia, Bulgaria, have provided new estimates of the optimum size of government, using standard models, with the latest data from a broader spectrum of countries than had been previously available. Their conclusion is that there is a 95 percent probability that the optimal size of government is less than 25 percent of GDP." -Richard Rahn, "The Optimum Government," Washington Times January 29, 2009 http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9918
Economic growth and new job creation begins to slow when total government spending is larger than about 25% of the economy. A year ago, it was about 36% of GDP. I don't know what it is now, but I assume it's even higher. So we don't need to choose between cutting spending and creating jobs. Cutting spending would create jobs.
Reply to this