Roosevelt’s “New Deal” déjà vu: President Barack Obama wants an infrastructure program to help prop up the obviously weakening economic stimulus initiatives. Large-scale rail transportation improvements are certainly needed in a country so dependent upon motor vehicles, but that alone won’t be enough to pull them out of the economic crisis. The same was true of Obama’s first and far more comprehensive stimulus program; it staved off a worst-case scenario, but it’s no longer enough. The fact that even an $800 billion stimulus package is insufficient comes as no surprise. The Republican Bush era left behind an economic trash heap — the banking and real estate crises along with monumental personal debt drove the American economy into a deep depression.
The Japanese example taught us that stimulus programs that are too small and start too late lead only to long-term dependence. The world’s third largest economy is still stuck in a deflationary cycle and its national debt has ballooned beyond belief. The United States, at least for now, is in a better position to take remedial action. Yet the conservatives, those responsible for the crisis who have thus far opposed every one of Obama’s remedies, sense they’re gaining traction. America’s miserable financial situation, of all things, is their main source of ammunition despite the fact that the collapse is due more to Bush’s war policies and tax breaks than to Obama’s stimulus spending. What’s needed is an economic fresh start with a strong welfare state and a strengthened tax base. But the pundits are predicting a conservative rollback instead.
Guess again, the primary cause of the disaster was the Community Reinvestment Act enacted years ago, under Clinton, that forced banks to give loans to people who did not have the ability to repay the loans. The financial problems did not begin until Democrats retained control of Congress in 2006. It took them two years to tank the economy, which they then blamed on Bush. The factors in the economic disaster that Bush is responsible for are the liberal spending programs that he sponsored like the Senior drug spending and No child left behind.
Free markets naturally have highs and lows, but disaster is the result of interfering with those natural occurrances. You are right about the roll-back…we are going to roll back all socialism.
If free markets don’t work, why was the U.S. the most prosperous, successful and generous nation when we actually practiced those policies and not a single socialist nation has ever achieved anything?
Best regards,
Gail S
http:\www.backyardfence.wordpress.com