I know that the stimulus bills are in a state of flux, but when I looked at Saturday's NY Times comparison of the House and Senate versions it seemed to me that our leaders are still trying to appeal to certain populations at the cost of the nation as a whole.
The most egregious example is the home buyer tax credit, which in the Senate version is estimated to cost $35.5 billion. First objection: speed is of the essence in restoring our economic health. The credit is at least a year away. How will it help tomorrow? Second objection: why are we helping new home buyers and not current homeowners?
Granted the alternative minimum tax has to be changed to reflect today's world. Is the stimulus bill the place to do this, particularly when it is estimated to cost $70 billion? Couldn't we improve the rapid transit system of one city for this kind of money?
Why is the House giving government contractors $11 billion? They are doing this by repealing a law that requires government agencies to withhold 3% of the payments to contractors so that they will pay their taxes; there are billions of uncollected taxes from companies that do government work. To emphasize the stupidity of this provision, the law will not take effect for two years. How is this putting money into the economy in 2009?
Again, the Senate. This time it's a provision to make interest and sales taxes on car loans tax-deductible. That's deductible next year, not this.
Of course, we must be 100% safe. So, billions are being given to Homeland Security. And we can't forget AIDS and avian flu; there is money in the House bill to combat these diseases. Sure, we should be researching ways to deal with these diseases. But not in the stimulus.
1 comment:
George Monbiot, in his latest article, quotes from William Hazlitt:
“Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps; for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be.”
I think that's appropriate here.
Post a Comment