View Single Post
Old 12-26-2012, 01:57 PM   #20
Rhumb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 100
My Ride: 2001 M3 Coupe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond42262 View Post
What the OP does not understand is that depending on the local environment, every dollar spent in the private sector will result in 4-7 dollars being spent in the total economy. So, the basis for the article is flawed from the beginning except to the uniformed.
Perhaps true (4-7 dollar assertion), but where the bulk of the federal spending goes to are inherently non-profitable (directly and/or near term) enterprises and endeavors that no private institution would ever touch with a ten foot stick. Defense is a prime example of a broad, long-term societal benefit far beyond the scope of any private enterprise. Sure, some corporation may and do hire private mercenaries, errr, contractors to protect their own limited and specific interests, but who other than the federal government is going to protect the full swath of our land, air and sea, much less protecting extra-territorial sea and air lanes and other land interests critical to our economic and even physical well being?

Sure, private entities can and do make large returns on investment on their focused and limited investments, as is their role and function, but federal "investments," if you will, can also reap significant, if more broadly dispersed in time and focus, returns on the dollar in fostering and protecting the broader functioning society within which said private enterprises can actually flourish.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond42262 View Post
Besides, how much of that stimulus spending improved the economy when 300m was given to Solyndra and they went bankrupt a year later ?
Another solar panel manufacturer that was a recipient of stimulus spending also went under a few weeks ago. No multiplier there.
What was the multiplier effect when Hillary channeled 4m dollars to a company in Chicago that does political surveys to hire 3 people ? Or was the stimulus just paying it forward for her 2016 campaign?
Regardless of the myopic focus on Solyndra, which did fail for various reasons, it was only a small fraction of the overall ARRA spending (never mind the infintismal amounts also brought up). No Wall Street investment firm bats anywhere near 100% either, so perhaps Solyndra's failure is better looked at in perspective of the overall ARRA success/failure rates. Given that orders of magnitude more massive trillion-dollar failures of Wall Street throughout 2007-09, perhaps a bit more modest tone might be due in accessing ARRA.

I'm certainly not about to defend every dollar of Federal Spending, but trying to tout small individual failures as somehow endemic or representative of all federal spending simply through analogy is itself a weak argument.
Rhumb is offline   Reply With Quote