Wall Street Weekly | 07/10/2009 9:45 am
Stimulus Not Working? Let's Have More! by Liz Peek
If the stimulus spending isn’t working, does it make sense to make it bigger?

© Shutterstock
Bears, Bulls, Chickens and Pigs: wOw’s Wall Street Weekly with Liz Peek (Week of 7/6)
Editor’s Note: Liz Peek is a financial columnist and the author of wOw’s SHEconomics.
Holy smoke! Now even the Pope is weighing in on financial regulation. In a rare encyclical, the Pontiff added his voice this week to those clamoring for economic overhaul. Come to think of it, maybe we could use some divine guidance.The Big Debate underway is whether the United States needs a new stimulus program. This is idiotic. Whether you are a fan or foe of the monstrous $787 billion package pushed through Congress earlier this year, it is preposterous to assume that such an ungainly mishmash of programs could be implemented to any real effect in just a few months. Some $100 to $150 billion of the total has been committed to various projects, but only a portion of that has found its way into bank accounts. Moreover, if the stimulus spending isn’t working – does it make sense to make it bigger? No!
Anxiety about the stimulus package, and about the course of the economy, stems mainly from rising unemployment. The administration’s rosy outlook for stemming job losses proved unrealistic. (This should give some pause to those who buy into Obama’s projected "cost savings" from health-care reform or "green job creation" from cap-and-trade. These numbers, truly, are complete fiction. There is nothing I have found in either bill that would support such projections.)
While the labor situation does look gruesome, there are some encouraging signs. The four-week moving average of unemployment claims dropped in May by 53,000; normally a decline of 40,000 would signal the end of a recession. Continuing claims, though still high, appear to be peaking. The truth is that the numbers are so messed up by the auto industry bankruptcies that they are inconclusive. Data from the next two or three months will be much more telling.
While the signals are still mixed, there continue to be more positive than negative readings on the economy. Business confidence is improving, earnings estimates are moving slightly higher, the drop in consumer credit has slowed, house prices are stabilizing and manufacturing inventories are dropping. Moreover, two serious developing headwinds – rising oil prices and higher interest rates – have slumped from their recent highs.
The latter is good news and bad news, and points to just how delicate the current outlook remains. Oil prices and interest rates have backed down because growth prospects suddenly dimmed – dimmed precisely because oil prices and interest rates had increased. Investors, and policymakers, are in effect chasing their own tails. As oil prices zoomed higher in recent months, and as investors become concerned about projected budget deficits from our free-spending administration, consumers were hit with higher fuel costs and a drop in the opportunity to refinance their mortgages. This latter activity, as I’ve written before, has been far more stimulative than any program out of the Beltway.
The respite on interest rates may prove short-lived. The Federal Reserve has signaled that it is becoming less aggressive in its purchases of certain assets, including Treasuries, as it begins to unwind the buildup of its balance sheet. Some fear the Fed may be moving too quickly to rein in its largesse, but others correctly point out that moves to stimulate or restrict the economy almost always are overdone.
The Fed has to get this sort of push-pull just right, or it is possible that we could indeed fall back into recession. Joe Biden was blasted recently for admitting that the administration had "misread" the economy. Newsflash: this is tricky business, which is why many people, including myself, are aghast at the Obama team’s growing incursions into all sectors of commerce.
Read more about: Barack Obama, Business, Ecnomic Stimulus, Government, Liz Peek, Money, News, Obama Administration, Wall Street Weekly























163 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
Barbara,
No greater truth out there. No one wants to throw good money after bad.
Ok why are people blaming Bush in one sentence and then turn around and blame Reagan in the next? Its all the Reps fault, we know.
We were asked to be patient so we are being patient, why do we need another one? Whose not being patient now?
USA Today reported this week that “counties that supported Obama last year have reaped twice as much money per person from the administration’s $787 billion economic stimulus package as those that voted for his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain.”
ABC News reported this week that the failed stimulus tracking website run by the White House, Recovery.gov, will get an additional $18 million, taxpayer-funded injection to support a “redesign.” The Washington Examiner’s David Freddoso points out that the contract was awarded to a Maryland firm whose donors have contributed $19,000 to Maryland’s House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.
The Washington Times reported this week that “as much as $16.1 million from the stimulus program is going to save the San Francisco Bay area habitat of, among other things, the endangered salt marsh harvest mouse” in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s backyard.
And despite all the initial focus on basic infrastructure needs, Land Line magazine reported this week that “even with federal stimulus spending that put shovels in the ground on new infrastructure projects, analysts predict an overall decline of 4.3 percent on infrastructure in 2009.”
The same under-handed, transparency-defying, earmark-stuffing process that marked the porkulus beast is dominating every other pricey piece of legislation hurtling through the Democrat-led Congress. The Waxman-Markey “cap and trade” bill that passed the House two weeks ago contained bribes galore – including a $50 million hurricane research center for Florida Democrat Alan Grayson and a $3.5 billion economic development “sweetener” package for Ohio Democrat Marcy Kaptur. The current health care takeover proposals feature a crucial payoff to Big Labor – a golden exemption from any tax on union members’ generous health care benefits.
The friends and patrons of Obama may be making out like bandits. But for everyone else, the Democrats’ ideological bankruptcy comes at a nauseatingly steep price.
What we have now with the knowledge of Obama generously giving stimulus money to those states that supported him in his campaign….it is simply called "Follow the money….." Obama should be ashamed but his ego won’t allow it. He will conveniently tell anyone who will listen now that he "inherited" this mess. He had a perfect opportunity to do what mattered most to Americans yet instead it’s more of the same….perhaps worse in this particular situation.
Follow the money…..it will be very painful for those in states that are struggling. No wonder he is at a minus 8 in the polls.
Deber, if Obama handed me $5K I could have bought my house sooner b/c $5K to me and $5K to my hubby would have paid off a major portion of our bills…Now we are having issues getting the mortgage…Can I blame that on Obama? :)
I think a lot of people would have used the money for good and then some would have saved it b/c that is how some people are…they save every dime they make but I feel more people would have spent it then saved it.
If Obama had stipulated that the $5,000 had to be spent in 60 days I don’t think people would’ve saved it to avoid the penalty tax. I’m often bewildered why the democrats didn’t put $5,000 into every qualified American’s hands right away.
I believe most people would’ve made great use of the money which in turn would’ve saved the jobs, small businesses and homes…………as well as those paying off credit card balances to their banks.
Health Care Tax Apalooza - It’s here!
Broaden the 1.45-percent Medicare tax on earned income to “passive income,” which could include money from capital gains, rental properties and businesses that do not require direct participation. This could raise $100 billion.
— Levy a five-percent surtax on individuals who earn more than $500,000 and couples that make $1 million.
— Tax health benefits at a higher level than had been considered. Two scenarios are in play. Taxing plans worth more than $20,300 for a family and $8,300 for an individual could raise $240 billion. Increasing the cut-off to plans worth more than $25,000 would bring $90 billion.
— Capping the tax break on itemized deductions at 28 percent, as President Barack Obama had proposed, or freezing the top deduction rate at 35 percent when the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010. The first scenario would raise $168 billion, while the second would collect $90 billion.
— Issue tax credit bonds to pay for the proposed Medicaid expansion, raising $75 billion.
— Charge fees to pharmaceutical manufacturers, bringing in as much as $20 billion, and insurance providers, raising $75 billion.
– Raise taxes on sodas and sugary drinks. A 3-cent hike could pick up $30 billion, and a 10-cent hike could make $100 billion. This one already appears out of favor: Many senators have specifically ruled out the sugar tax, and a Senate Democratic source said it was the one option that was clearly not gaining traction with committee members.
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/07/10/health-care-tax-apalooza-its-here/