On The Go: RSS | Newsletters | Mobile

Report Backs Leaders Who Reject Stimulus Money

An Ohio group that supports less government concluded that stimulus money "will actually worsen the economy's performance."

Click here to read the full story.

Post a Comment
Video Comments
No comments yet!
Comments
motard117 - 5/6/2009 7:25 AM
Some economists believe FDR's policies lengthened the depression by 7 years, as his policies allowed businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they should have been. "Demand side" is not a name of a recession, it is a method of DEALING with a recession. Yes, we are in a demand side situation, because Obama is spending us into a hole. Supply side has worked many times in the past (Kennedy, Reagan, Bush II), so many of us who have lived through these times (as opposed to reading about it) that are posting here (assuming you are young) understand. One caveat: Supply vs. demand side is very political. Be sure your proffesor is void of any political bias. Hope the grammar was ok.

econ201 - 5/5/2009 9:17 AM
I respectfully disagree.

maggie22 - 5/5/2009 8:51 AM
Keynesian economics was actually discredited as it lengthened the Depression by years.

econ201 - 5/5/2009 8:43 AM
Wow, some of these comments are mind-boggling. First, take a course in proper grammar. Second, take a course in macroeconomics so you can understand why increasing government spending actually increases GDP and other macroeconomic indicators, along with increasing consumer income through the multiplier effect. Sure, the free market can correct the economy in a supply-side-driven recession (Reagan-era), but not a demand-side recession, such as this one and the Great Depression. Keynesian economics was given credibility as a result of the Great Depression and the actions taken to mitigate it. The economic factors of this situation are very similar, and the action that must be taken is also similar. Sorry guys, but I have to agree with the econ professor on this one.

VWJennifer - 5/5/2009 7:55 AM
nai-How can you be for a government that would just throw MORE money at Cincinnati because Columbus didn't take it? Just because they have an amount budgeted DOESN'T mean they have to SPEND it.

naistewart - 5/5/2009 12:33 AM
Rejecting this money is arrogant ignorance. Other cities/states will take it and we'll pay the bill anyway and then have to pay for whatever the stimulus was supposed to provide us. It's hatred of Obama and his success. Plain and simple.

localboy2 - 5/5/2009 12:17 AM
I agree that the Government giving away money means more taxes (we the working class)will have to pay later on!It`s a lose- lose situation!!America will see if this stimulus money will work for us or work for those Government employee`s(politicians) keeping there jobs!!!...I`ll be so bold to say this,"If your a politician you should work for Free"!!!Like our country`s forefather`s did when this great country started...

VWJennifer - 5/4/2009 9:56 PM
It is a tried-and-true tested failure to go down this path. I am grateful to those with enough sense to reject the monies offered. Look at the liberties Obama has already taken with companies and banks that received money-you'd have to be seriously slow to sell your City to the government, and any Official who does so should be ousted by the voters.

maggie22 - 5/4/2009 8:22 PM
Just because you call something "stimulus" doesn't mean it has that effect. It does mean that taxes will have to go up which is an ultimate drag on the economy. I'm amazed that people who should know better don't see the down-side of taking money out of the economy (taxes). A free market will correct itself much quicker than a government contrived one.


  This site is hosted and managed by Inergize Digital.