In the next installment of things that tell me snowballs’ chances in hell are improving: Rush Limbaugh wrote a great article regarding the stimulus package about how to balance the Keynesian (spend to stimulate) and supply-side (cut taxes to stimulate) theories in a bi-partisan compromise.
There was no derogatory comments about minorities, no references to reverse discrimination, no mockery, and only mild narcissism. Anyone thinking…ghost writer?
In all seriousness, this is a great article passed along to me by my good friend and fellow political junkie, Steve Phillips. It reflects the intelligence that Rush does have (that was hard for me to say).
Keynesian economists believe government spending on “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects — schools, roads, bridges — is the best way to stimulate our staggering economy. Supply-side economists make an equally persuasive case that tax cuts are the surest and quickest way to create permanent jobs and cause an economy to rebound.
As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion — $486 billion — will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% — $414 billion — will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me.
Then we compare. We see which stimulus actually works. This is bipartisanship! It would satisfy the American people’s wishes, as polls currently note; and it would also serve as a measurable test as to which approach best stimulates job growth.