Quote:
Originally Posted by Tex
I was using the term "legit" in the sense of "legitimate stimulus expenses." I guess we'd have to know more specifics to define exactly how legitimate they are in the broader sense of Washington spending, but regardless, this is not stimulus. This is pork.
Or perhaps you'd like to make the case for how $125m for Washington sewers stimulates the economy.
|
?
Why would you take the position that none of the items above "stimulate" the economy? Are you under the impression that paying for improvements to water and sewer treatment, for example, goes into a big black hole that nobody benefits from?
There are a few theories on how to stimulate the economy. One theory is that you spend as much as possible, in diverse sectors of the economy, to lift multiple sectors rather than just one. Water and sewer plants hire people. Construction work requires people doing jobs. Those people get money rather than get laid off. You may argue it isn't the BEST way to stimulate the economy (debatable, and nobody really knows), but it is totally absurd to argue it has no effect on the economy at all. Spending of this amount will have an effect. The debate ought to be whether it is the most efficient way of attaining the desired result rather than whether there is any effect at all.