« The Great Divide – more are thinking about it (updated) | Main | KVMR commentary - 'The blue of the grass' »

09 April 2010

Comments

Russ

It makes you wonder about stimulus spending, with there is so much waste. Ellen and I saw a report on Fox News this morning about an upgrade to a borders station in Northern Maine. Few people use the station according to locals, no traffic in the winter, only open 8-4 daily, closed on Sunday. But, we have spend $10 million to upgrade this station and take peoples property for a big parking lot, and new office building, new housing that no one will use. The current border guard house sits empty. Why not send that $10 Million to Nevada County, the ERC could put it to better use build our broadband network.

Here is a link to the video: http://video.foxnews.com/v/4143740/national-security-issue

Mikey McD

Keynesian economics = planned economic suicide. It was engineered as a tool for politicians- something to add credibility to their scandalous ways. I fail to see how those on the right (against all forms of stimulus- "stimulus is a crock") are somehow reaping what they sow. The dots don't connect. I admire Ron Paul because of the actions that earned him the nickname "Dr. No."

Account Deleted

I studied German and Spanish in school, but it looks like I shoulda' studied BS. The "concentration" of transit, infrastructure and housing improvements has nothing to do with the difference of what is requested and what is obtained. It has been shown that the money goes not to those who have needs as outlined by Barry, but those who voted for Barry. Yes, I know that this county strayed badly from it's normal course in the idiot hope that the "new guy" would live up to the hype that was handed out by his campaign to the MSNM and reported verbatim. But GR has cast a spell o'er the land and this has come to the attention of the WH. Obama rose to power in the Daley machine and will govern thus. Hey, BO supporters, hows that caulking (watch the spelling) program coming in the golden state? Billions wasted and 100 bucks of sealant applied. Now they can run their AC with the windows and doors open.Progress!

Russ

Veronique de Rugy a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center has updated her paper on how and where the stimulus is being spent, following some interesting feedback about her Mercatus working paper.

As it turns out, when controlling for state capitals and a host of other potentially relevant variables, we find that the original findings still hold. We learn a few other things, too:

First, how and where the money is spent doesn’t seem to be related to unemployment or decline in employment in the district where it is spent.

Second, the district’s party affiliation matters in where the money is spent. (We still don’t know how much it matters compared to other factors.) The average Democratic district receives 81 percent more than the average Republican district. Even after taking out the money spent through state capitals, the average Democratic district receives at least 30 percent more than the average Republican district.

Third, whether a district has part of a state capital in it is an important factor in how stimulus money is spent. However, controlling for this factor, or even taking the money going to state capitals out altogether, doesn’t negate the finding that the district’s party affiliation matters in where the money is spent.

Finally, how long the district’s representative has been in office seems to have a small but significant impact on how the money is spent (this is a new finding, as well).

My emphasis added to high light the issues. More details here:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTUzODQzMjY5ZGY1ZWQ3OGJmMDA1ZTRkNzFmMTM2MWI

Steven Frisch

Just to be accurate, that was not a "stand alone" comment. I was responding to George's observation that Democratic districts were receiving more money than Republican ones.

It is bull crap for George to put a quote up like this out of context. If you wanted to respond to the original comment the proper net etiquette would have been to respond to it within its original thread so people could see the context for themselves. In addition you did not include the spelling correction I immediately appended.

When did you start acting like a yellow journalist? Perhaps it was when I started questioning why you would be qualified to be "the defender of western civilization" as you said in previous post.

My point was that perhaps Democratic districts were receiving more money because they were not full of anger and angst about delivering services to their people and they were willing to ACTUALLY APPLY FOR IT.


Douglas Keachie

"But our handicapped language no longer supports a clear discussion of the illegal alien problem. "

Nope, it is not a language problem. It is a logic problem. Why do the come? They come for money. How do they get money? They often work for it, and an employer gives it to them.

How do you efficiently stop the cycle?

You fine or jail the employers, if they are caught hiring illegals. How will they know? After the first 100 are sitting in jail, having paid out $10,000, no one will hire anyone.

Oh really? A new industry will spring up, that creates biometric ID for workers, having very carefully vetted them. Employers will pay to have the vetting company issue a bond certifying the bear of said ID to be a citizen of the USA.

Of course the Repubbys who hire cheap labor and depend on it for union busting will never let it go through. Americans won't pick crops? Elephant exhaust! For $20/hour they will. Pass the cost on to the consumer. Oh, the consumer will only buy produce from overseas? Overseas doesn't produce enough. California exports food.

Dems want voters? Nowhere near as bad as Repubbys want their illegal workers.

The comments to this entry are closed.