Recession: What are the chioces?

[MagisterCultuum]

Politicians need to appear to be doing something helpful in order to help their own careers. That doesn't mean that the government must appear to do something for the sake of the economy. That might help, but if the people realize the the government isn't doing things that will really help then it could have the opposite effect. The fear tactics being used to get the government action through certainly have a negative effect on the economy, which may more than offset the perception of positive action. Perhaps if the package could have passed with broad bipartisan and popular support the psychological effect could have helped the recovery, but as it is I suspect the bill will only make things worse.



I tend to think that most of the New Deal made things worse, and such programs should be dismantled. Getting rid of them entirely would cause panic, so that of course shouldn't be done, but slowly weaning us off of reliance would be good. The first thing I would do is get rid of the Payroll tax. After that I'd consider possibly moving to the Fair Tax, or some variant thereof (I'd probably exempt prescription drugs and foods that meet certain health standards and have additional externality-based tariffs on pollution/human rights abuses/unfair market manipulation (to deal with cartels, exchange rate manipulation) and increased sin taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and soon to be legalized drugs), so that economic decisions would be based less on tax loopholes and more on whether they are wise choices.


I'd also seek to increase CEO accountability by such measures as requiring shareholder votes on all executive pay raises and bonuses, instead of making new regulations that can be circumvented.

There probably needs to be some more legislation/prosecution to deal with extreme cases of usury. The way Credit Scores work really needs some adjustments.

 

[crabapple]

9/11 was random and has had ramifications on how the housing crisis began and played into the current fiscal crisis. I was specifically hinting that another terrorist attack would be another straw on the camel that' s very thirsty right now

9/11 wasnt random, read some history. There where warnings that a terrorist attack would happen. But i guess thats not the topic of the thread

/Offtopic

 

[Princeps]

Of course. Every self-respecting anarcho-capitalist knows that any compulsory deal is ineffective,

Every complex human social system relies on enforcement (to some extent), including the anarcho-capitalist conception in which laws would be taken to the extreme (extreme, as in unalterable, universal, inalianable, dogmatically narrow), but basically recontextualized in property enforcement, property being the coercive foundation of libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

9/11 wasnt random, read some history. There where warnings that a terrorist attack would happen. But i guess thats not the topic of the thread

/Offtopic

Random in the business world. I doubt investors concern themselves with the probability of terrorist attacks. Or the probability of said attack destroying a major office complex and spreading dust and debris all over a central business district.

 

[crabapple]

Random in the business world. I doubt investors concern themselves with the probability of terrorist attacks. Or the probability of said attack destroying a major office complex and spreading dust and debris all over a central business district.

well they should, only caring about the short term is what made this crisis. Buisness people should try to get some perspective on things and see the long term

 

[JerichoHill]

Crabapple.

I mention random in the business world. Not anticipating a major terrorist attack isn't "only caring about the short-term," Further, there are plenty of business folk who do work for the long term. Can we not generalize?

 

[Cutlass]

Politicians need to appear to be doing something helpful in order to help their own careers. That doesn't mean that the government must appear to do something for the sake of the economy. That might help, but if the people realize the the government isn't doing things that will really help then it could have the opposite effect. The fear tactics being used to get the government action through certainly have a negative effect on the economy, which may more than offset the perception of positive action. Perhaps if the package could have passed with broad bipartisan and popular support the psychological effect could have helped the recovery, but as it is I suspect the bill will only make things worse.



I tend to think that most of the New Deal made things worse, and such programs should be dismantled. Getting rid of them entirely would cause panic, so that of course shouldn't be done, but slowly weaning us off of reliance would be good. The first thing I would do is get rid of the Payroll tax. After that I'd consider possibly moving to the Fair Tax, or some variant thereof (I'd probably exempt prescription drugs and foods that meet certain health standards and have additional externality-based tariffs on pollution/human rights abuses/unfair market manipulation (to deal with cartels, exchange rate manipulation) and increased sin taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and soon to be legalized drugs), so that economic decisions would be based less on tax loopholes and more on whether they are wise choices.


I'd also seek to increase CEO accountability by such measures as requiring shareholder votes on all executive pay raises and bonuses, instead of making new regulations that can be circumvented.

There probably needs to be some more legislation/prosecution to deal with extreme cases of usury. The way Credit Scores work really needs some adjustments.

People keep saying "get rid of the payroll tax", but never say what they will replace it with. Social Security won't end as long as there is a US government. So how will you pay for it without the payroll tax?

And forget the fairytale tax. Completing the extermination of the American middle class benefits us not at all.

Of course. Every self-respecting anarcho-capitalist knows that any compulsory deal is ineffective,

I wonder why people would think that anarcho-capitalist wouldn't be totalitarian state and planned economy?

 

[Naskra]

So go with the least harm stimulus. Which, for what its worth, the libertarians over at MarginalRevolution seem to think is pretty close to what we got.

I read MR too, And I would never descibe Cowen or Tabarrok as libertarians.
Libertarian-sympathizers, perhaps. You'll find some libertarians in the comments area, and they are (surprise) outraged at the stimulus-gigandus.

MR is a good link site and cross-fertilization zone, but Cowen, an obviously well-read, clever,and congenial man, is also a tenured rent-seeker and empoyee of the state. If he has any convictions, he hides them well -- a thorough temporizer.