Yes, bear with me on this one.
First I want to give Bunning some credit. If you don’t know what’s going on, he is halting the Senate essentially (although they could vote today regardless of his objection) on a 30 day extension for jobless benefits funds. He’s getting a lot of heat because he just up and decided that this is what he would raise objection on, yet he supported the Bush tax cuts, war funding, etc. In that aspect suspicion is rightly placed. However, I’ve been watching alot of news programs twist this into partisan politic, wickedness, etc. This is what he is really doing. He’s not trying to halt jobless benefits; he wants to take the money for it from allocated funds, like stimulus funds, instead of increasing the debt. That’s it. So, I’ll give him a pat on the back for sticking to a principle (even if it just suddenly appeared).
Ok, so what is the leap of faith? How about how all of this anger is coming from the possibility that government won’t be able to spend money on people who use the government for sustenance. This leads me to the still constant idea that the government spending (bailouts and stimulus funds) saved us from the brink of disaster and that it is insanity to try and take money away from the mega-awesome stimulus. Following me? Ok, as this article points out nicely, it has, in fact, impeded our recovery and constantly deprecates our level of prosperity (I know thats like preaching to the choir to most of those that read these posts). In the article, Doug French tackles specifically the idea that deflation leads to doom and that the deflationary “recessions” of the 1800s caused by failing banks are proof of this. I let you guess whether or not French agrees.Published in