Thursday, 6/30/16, Public Square

Friday, 4/11/14, Public Square

Wednesday, 3/5/14, Public Square

Monday, 6/4/12, Public Square

Saturday, 7/16/11, Public Square

Tuesday, 2/1/11, Public Square

Sunday, 1/30/11, Public Square

Stimulus Efforts: Too Small or Wasted Money?

 

It seems like there are two camps on the question posed by the title of this thread.  Paul Krugman holding the first position that the stimulus was too small (we will not go there, for those of you thinking innuendo), and the second camp, mainly composed of conservatives, who complain that the results of the stimulus has not helped that much and is producing crushing debt.  It would seem to me that evidence for both positions could be found.

See this link:  http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/07/second-stimulus-debate-geithner-vs.html

I have never taken an economics class, but I am impressed by the fuzziness of the discipline.  I am interested in psychology, so I am reasonably tolerant of methodological uncertainty. Is there such a thing as experimental economics?

If we look at history, one interpretation is that the stimulus programs of FDR in the 1930’s were successful, in at least making a bad situation less worse.  Does that sound familiar, or not? 

Amity Shlaes suggests that the FDR administration’s hostility toward wealthy people and the ineffectiveness of government interventions actually prolonged the great depression.  In fairness RE: this source,  Shlaes is a conservative Wall Street Journal editorial commentator.

http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780066211701/The_Forgotten_Man/index.aspx

So, who is correct in their assessment?  The right, the left, both, or neither – please offer your opinion; it can’t be any worse or better than those out there already.  Thanks!

iggy donnelly

Will equality for females be silver lining of economic dark cloud?

Men bear the brunt of US jobs lost

The US recession has opened up the biggest gap between male and female unemployment rates since records began in 1948, as men bear the brunt of the economy’s contraction.

Men have lost almost 80 per cent of the 5.1m jobs that have gone in the US since the recession started, pushing the male unemployment rate to 8.8 per cent. The female jobless rate has hit 7 per cent.  This is a dramatic reversal of the trend over the past few years, where the rates of male and female unemployment barely differed, at about 5 per cent. It also means that women could soon overtake men as the majority of the US labor force.

Men have been disproportionately hurt because they dominate those industries that have been crushed: nine in every 10 construction workers are male, as are seven in every 10 manufacturing workers. These two sectors alone have lost almost 2.5m jobs. Women, in contrast, tend to hold more cyclically stable jobs and make up 75 per cent of the most insulated sectors of all: education and healthcare.

The widening gap between male and female joblessness means many US families are solely reliant on the income the woman brings in. Since women earn on average 20 per cent less than men, that is putting extra strain on many households.

Another report says — So the men of corporate America created the financial mess. Big surprise. Can the growing ranks of female CEOs help clean up the mess? The latest Fortune 500 rankings show a record number of women are running top companies. And while many of these women pull in relatively modest salaries, some of their companies are weathering the economic storm with relative ease.

Will this economic storm result in women proving themselves and finally attaining equality in the work force?

fnord