From a guy that works in construction (me), I found the notion of a shovel ready project (especially one owned by a public agency) to be rather comical.
Randy
· 2 months ago
Good point. Use of the term "shovel ready" pretty much marks the user as "clueless"... unless they are talking about literally just digging holes... which, given their philosophy, they just might be.
ArrowSmith
· 2 months ago
Stop asking questions. Worship Obama.
OnlyShawn
· 2 months ago
Hey hey...let's comment 'peaceably'! In fact, I hereby award you for what your comments WILL be, rather than what they are.
William
· 2 months ago
The two transportation projects funded by the "stimulus" bill that I've seen--resurfacing of 495 north of the American Legion Bridge and on Old Georgetown Road in Bethesda--are proceeding amazingly slowly.
OnlyShawn
· 2 months ago
While this *is* me, colored shocked, what're you comparing their progress to?
Mark
· 2 months ago
It is hard for any roadwork project to go quickly. When you judge this project on 495 north as going slowly, what are you comparing it to?
Road projects are difficult because traffic and right of ways have to be coordinated and planned throughout the process.
What is disengenuous about the whole "shovel ready" sell is that it created the impression that there would be this massive public works outlay that would result in projects occuring immediately. Even if 100% of the stimulus money was scheduled only for public works, the notion of "shovel ready" projects would still be misleading.
That is just not the way construction works - especially public works!
Mommsen1625
· 2 months ago
As far as I can tell the planned spending was supposed to be drawn out but at the same time it was supposed to immediately boost the economy in a dramatic fashion. How those two go together I cannot say.
Mommsen1625
· 2 months ago
Also, I liked what Christopher Westley called C4C: "The 'I Hate the Poor' Act of 2009."
The “statesmen” have carefully timed the “stimulus” to achieve its intended effect: to stimulate votes for incumbents in the 2010 elections. In fact, they are so far-sighted, they are even saving a bit of it for 2012.
ArrowSmith
· 2 months ago
Are the American people that stupid?
jakeshep
· 2 months ago
Methinks recent evidence supports a positive answer to your question.
Which is it, the Wisdom of Crowds, or the stupidity of crowds proven by their tendency to herd around people and ideas that promise them the impossible, like a free lunch?
Methinks
· 2 months ago
The only thing in government that's shovel ready is the vast majority of government and its programs. Those are all more than ready for the undertaker's shovel.
gregmason
· 2 months ago
I know that my Representative and two Senators here in Virginia don't have time to read Cafe Hayek (because they are too busy reading the health care proposed language) so I sent them a copy of this blog this morning. Thanks for the information
Name
· 2 months ago
dealers got their money from the taxpayer, but september car sales were awful. Cash for clunkers was a total failure.
Frank
· 2 months ago
Is your first sentence quite accurate? The table at the top of the web page that you appear to refer to says that it is the "US Total for contracts, grants loans and entitlements" and does not appear to include the $288bn of tax relief (See the Did You Know box lower down on the page.) Has that $288bn of tax relief not been "spent"?
breaks the What about the $288bn of tax relief? That doesn't seem to be included in the totals on the website.
Frank
· 2 months ago
Sorry, just found this link - http://www.recovery.gov/News/featured/Pages/Est.... that shows that $62.5bn of the tax relief had been spent through the end of August. So, they still haven't spent a lot but they have spent more than $111bn.
miraclemax
· 2 months ago
There's a lot you don't know.
1. Of the $787 billion, there are big pieces for AMT relief and tax cuts, not tracked by Recovery.gov. Roberts' implied denominator is fallacious.
2. The spending reported on the web site is for reimbursement of spending that has already occurred by the recipient. There is a lag between the two.
3. The aid to state governments is spread over their fiscal year, which usually runs from July to June. In fact there are ways the money could have been spent before receipt, or in some future fiscal year (state govs have foresight and can borrow and lend).
4. Most important, especially to an economist, unless you postulate what a recipient would have done with no recovery act, YOU DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT OF THE ASSISTANCE ON TOTAL NET SPENDING.
There are reasonable critiques of the whole package, from either a left or right standpoint, but the remarks from BC and RR do not include any.
All Comments
Road projects are difficult because traffic and right of ways have to be coordinated and planned throughout the process.
What is disengenuous about the whole "shovel ready" sell is that it created the impression that there would be this massive public works outlay that would result in projects occuring immediately. Even if 100% of the stimulus money was scheduled only for public works, the notion of "shovel ready" projects would still be misleading.
That is just not the way construction works - especially public works!
http://fee.org/articles/hate-poor-act-2009/
Which is it, the Wisdom of Crowds, or the stupidity of crowds proven by their tendency to herd around people and ideas that promise them the impossible, like a free lunch?
breaks the What about the $288bn of tax relief? That doesn't seem to be included in the totals on the website.
1. Of the $787 billion, there are big pieces for AMT relief and tax cuts, not tracked by Recovery.gov. Roberts' implied denominator is fallacious.
2. The spending reported on the web site is for reimbursement of spending that has already occurred by the recipient. There is a lag between the two.
3. The aid to state governments is spread over their fiscal year, which usually runs from July to June. In fact there are ways the money could have been spent before receipt, or in some future fiscal year (state govs have foresight and can borrow and lend).
4. Most important, especially to an economist, unless you postulate what a recipient would have done with no recovery act, YOU DON'T KNOW THE IMPACT OF THE ASSISTANCE ON TOTAL NET SPENDING.
There are reasonable critiques of the whole package, from either a left or right standpoint, but the remarks from BC and RR do not include any.