Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Steroids for the country?

Just a short post to report that things seem under control. Swelling of my hands is down - don't think I actually had any neuropathy and the rash - while still on my arm doesn't seem to be doing anything and isn't getting worse. I had a good day at work yesterday and spent much of the day thinking about what is going on with Stimulus in the Senate. I loved Obama's speech last night but I still want to shake them all and ask some of the Republicans what they think stimulus is if not spending.

The part that seemed like a no brainer to me in stimulus was the aid to states for current spending - keeping states from raising taxes or cutting spending (which means lower benefits or layoffs) seem like good first steps to keep governments from working at cross purposes. While they might have been better off doing this as general aid - putting it through the education and healthcare bills seemed like a reasonable way to allocate it so that it could actually take into account some differences in economic conditions and be somewhat targeted if not explicitly so.
But I like spending and it seems like a better way to get money out and spent.

Also so much of the tax credits that seem like they were put in to get Republicans on board seem poorly targeted and ineffective given the current state of business. Are tax credits really going to help much when banks and businesses are in the red? (There is a host of new tax credits for muni debt in the bill.) And the change in the housing credit - which lets anyone take it, not just new homebuyers, takes away refundability and income limits simply gives even more incentive for richer people to invest in housing. Part of our current problems in housing might be due to the fact that the tax code already favors housing over other investment so explicitly.

Not sure how effective I'm being at work but thinking about these things keeps me busy. The current issues on my mind both now and longer term is what we are going to do for the economy and then what it all means for whether when we should rethink the whole federal-state-local relationship. Federal funds are generally given out in ways that on net aren't related to state overall needs due to the myriad of programs and while states have control of budgets and funding priorities - underlying economic conditions play a huge part in differences across the country and maybe we should be restructuring either annual funds or set things up for downturns. As a country we are going to need to think about where we are going and there is going to need to be tax increases and spending cuts in the future to bring things into balance. Much of this predates and may have helped cause the current problems.

We need to act like grownups but I hope that doesn't mean forgetting about people who are suffering and not able to afford food or heat. During all of my health issues I remain fundamentally grateful and aware about how lucky I am to have both good health insurance, a secure job and supportive environment to be going through this. So many others are worse off.

Yes this is a little too wonky and I need to shower and go to work - but I'm hoping even if rambly the fact that I am focussed on how much in the red the country is and will be rather than the red on my body will be encouraging and a sign that things are on track. (Again it may all be the steroids - maybe we should rename stimulus as steroids for the country but that may only get me and the ballplayers on board.)

1 comment:

  1. It's so good to hear you sounding like an econ geek again.

    ReplyDelete