<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Stimulus Was Doomed To Fail</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rjmoeller.com/2009/12/the-stimulus-was-doomed-to-fail/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rjmoeller.com/2009/12/the-stimulus-was-doomed-to-fail/</link>
	<description>In Defense of &#34;Mere Conservatism&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:15:44 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Caleb Bennett</title>
		<link>http://rjmoeller.com/2009/12/the-stimulus-was-doomed-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-1383</link>
		<dc:creator>Caleb Bennett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:21:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjmoeller.com/?p=1342#comment-1383</guid>
		<description>The fact that you (the above commenter) are trying to disconnect socialism and jobs shows that you clearly have no idea what socialism is. Socialism is the government ownership of the means of production, with the primary goal of universal employment and equal distribution of resources. To say that Obama is socialist and that he doesn&#039;t care about jobs is self-contradicting.

It&#039;s not entirely true that the stimulus is redistributing money from one area of the economy to the other. We aren&#039;t taking the stimulus from taxes. We&#039;re taking the second option, which is to go into debt. By going into debt, we are not redistributing money across markets, but across time. We are taking the money away from expected future growth and using it to bring ourselves out of the recession. Instead of thinking of it like a pool, think of it more like a sandbox. There are several large mounds of sand in the box, but the rest of the sandbox has little-to-no sand in it. What we are doing is effectively redistributing the sand from the mounds to make a level sandbox. The analogy is a bad one, but I&#039;m sure you get the idea. The goal is to break the cycle of boom and bust so that there are as few disruptions in the economy as possible. 

The technique, in a rigid authoritarian government where no mistakes are ever made, would work, though the interest on the debt would lower the net economic growth (ideally speaking, under such a system, there would be no interest). The problem with this idea is that government officials act rationally. By rationally, I mean that they act in their own best interests. For the government to perform the necessary redistribution, it would have to be entirely concerned with the &quot;national interest&quot;, a mythical concept that infers a universal value structure common to all citizens of a certain nation. That would require government officials to act irrationally, that is, to act in such a way that it is not in their own best interest. 

Politicians are primarily concerned with maintaining their power. This includes keeping certain interests and constituents happy, which takes money. Of course, said interests and constituents are also rational, and are therefore concerned with their own wellbeing. Basically, there are too many interests involved for a policy of financial redistribution to be effective. Too many hands in the pot serving too many private interests. That&#039;s why we get bills like the stimulus package. In all honesty, that&#039;s why we get all of the bills we have. Politicians are trying to keep their private interests and constituents happy. 

This is why government intervention is a bad thing. It is also one of the guiding ideas behind our constitution. The founders didn&#039;t want the type of corruption I just described, and tried to build a set of conflicting interests that would keep each other in check. Of course, the greatest example of this is the electorate, which is composed of as many interests as there are people who qualify to vote. The one problem the founders could not protect against was the ignorance and stupidity of the American public. We have failed to serve our own best interests, and are thereby allowing private interest groups to control the government. The politicians are just representatives of whatever interest group gets them elected. That interest group is supposed to be the electorate. Unfortunately, it&#039;s not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fact that you (the above commenter) are trying to disconnect socialism and jobs shows that you clearly have no idea what socialism is. Socialism is the government ownership of the means of production, with the primary goal of universal employment and equal distribution of resources. To say that Obama is socialist and that he doesn&#8217;t care about jobs is self-contradicting.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not entirely true that the stimulus is redistributing money from one area of the economy to the other. We aren&#8217;t taking the stimulus from taxes. We&#8217;re taking the second option, which is to go into debt. By going into debt, we are not redistributing money across markets, but across time. We are taking the money away from expected future growth and using it to bring ourselves out of the recession. Instead of thinking of it like a pool, think of it more like a sandbox. There are several large mounds of sand in the box, but the rest of the sandbox has little-to-no sand in it. What we are doing is effectively redistributing the sand from the mounds to make a level sandbox. The analogy is a bad one, but I&#8217;m sure you get the idea. The goal is to break the cycle of boom and bust so that there are as few disruptions in the economy as possible. </p>
<p>The technique, in a rigid authoritarian government where no mistakes are ever made, would work, though the interest on the debt would lower the net economic growth (ideally speaking, under such a system, there would be no interest). The problem with this idea is that government officials act rationally. By rationally, I mean that they act in their own best interests. For the government to perform the necessary redistribution, it would have to be entirely concerned with the &#8220;national interest&#8221;, a mythical concept that infers a universal value structure common to all citizens of a certain nation. That would require government officials to act irrationally, that is, to act in such a way that it is not in their own best interest. </p>
<p>Politicians are primarily concerned with maintaining their power. This includes keeping certain interests and constituents happy, which takes money. Of course, said interests and constituents are also rational, and are therefore concerned with their own wellbeing. Basically, there are too many interests involved for a policy of financial redistribution to be effective. Too many hands in the pot serving too many private interests. That&#8217;s why we get bills like the stimulus package. In all honesty, that&#8217;s why we get all of the bills we have. Politicians are trying to keep their private interests and constituents happy. </p>
<p>This is why government intervention is a bad thing. It is also one of the guiding ideas behind our constitution. The founders didn&#8217;t want the type of corruption I just described, and tried to build a set of conflicting interests that would keep each other in check. Of course, the greatest example of this is the electorate, which is composed of as many interests as there are people who qualify to vote. The one problem the founders could not protect against was the ignorance and stupidity of the American public. We have failed to serve our own best interests, and are thereby allowing private interest groups to control the government. The politicians are just representatives of whatever interest group gets them elected. That interest group is supposed to be the electorate. Unfortunately, it&#8217;s not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Phillip Sandusky</title>
		<link>http://rjmoeller.com/2009/12/the-stimulus-was-doomed-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-1376</link>
		<dc:creator>Phillip Sandusky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:17:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rjmoeller.com/?p=1342#comment-1376</guid>
		<description>Obama does not really care about creating jobs.  His main strategy is turning our Constitutional form of government into a socialistic form, found couched in his language of &quot;change you can believe in&quot; and &quot;we are going to fundamentally change this country.&quot;  

He is set on redistributing the wealth within the United States and from the United States to the developing world.  His tactics are creating turmoil and fear on every front so his strategy may be fulfulled.  His tactics are not designed to create but to destroy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama does not really care about creating jobs.  His main strategy is turning our Constitutional form of government into a socialistic form, found couched in his language of &#8220;change you can believe in&#8221; and &#8220;we are going to fundamentally change this country.&#8221;  </p>
<p>He is set on redistributing the wealth within the United States and from the United States to the developing world.  His tactics are creating turmoil and fear on every front so his strategy may be fulfulled.  His tactics are not designed to create but to destroy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

