From Cryptogon.
A new piece of evidence has emerged in the debate over the effectiveness of President Obama’s 2009 stimulus package, and it’s not good for Democrats. According to two newly released audits performed by the Los Angeles controller, L.A. spent enormous portions of the $594 million in stimulus funds it received on projects that created or saved just a handful of jobs. All told, the audits — available here and here [pdf] — examined $111 million in stimulus spending by the city’s Department of Transportation and Department of Public Works, and found that the money went to projects that created or retained just 54 jobs. That works out to roughly $2 million per job...
Showing posts with label stimulus plan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stimulus plan. Show all posts
Friday, October 22, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
NYT Lauds Hitler's Stimulus Plan
This is old news, but I just came across it. In this New York Times article an economist uses the example of the works programs of Hitler to show how stimulus can work quite well indeed. As he says:
"But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries. Corporate profits boomed, and unemployment sank (and not because of slave labor, which didn’t become widespread until later). Harold James, an economic historian, says that the young liberal economists studying under John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment."
Now....this is the New York Times, and I don't mean to say the writer should be restricted from saying this if he believes it is important. But! Read in this Bloomberg article how the very same kind of statement is used to describe the late far-right politician of Austria, Jörg Haider.
(The article goes on to mention that Haider also visited former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Well....who are we kidding? Look who else did in the video below. )
My point is not to try to rehabilitate Haider, or make Haider seem more mainstream, but to demonstrate the contradictions within our own mainstream. Of course it is less 'scary' for Americans to know that the New York Times is praising Hitler and that Rumsfeld is shaking hands with dictators then to know that a 'far-right' son of a Nazi is doing this.
Because America would never embrace the 'son of a nazi.'
And he has even regaled himself with Nazi style decorations.
"But Germany did escape the Great Depression faster than other countries. Corporate profits boomed, and unemployment sank (and not because of slave labor, which didn’t become widespread until later). Harold James, an economic historian, says that the young liberal economists studying under John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s began to debate whether Hitler had solved unemployment."
Now....this is the New York Times, and I don't mean to say the writer should be restricted from saying this if he believes it is important. But! Read in this Bloomberg article how the very same kind of statement is used to describe the late far-right politician of Austria, Jörg Haider.
(The article goes on to mention that Haider also visited former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Well....who are we kidding? Look who else did in the video below. )
My point is not to try to rehabilitate Haider, or make Haider seem more mainstream, but to demonstrate the contradictions within our own mainstream. Of course it is less 'scary' for Americans to know that the New York Times is praising Hitler and that Rumsfeld is shaking hands with dictators then to know that a 'far-right' son of a Nazi is doing this.
Because America would never embrace the 'son of a nazi.'
And he has even regaled himself with Nazi style decorations.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
