How the American media fails us

Where’s the mainstream media’s global perspective on the numerous acts of government intervention (a.k.a stimulus packages), I ask? We tout the global economy as a source of pride (in good economic times) and as a source of pain in bad (like right now). Regardless, the message is that we impact and are impacted by other nation’s economies. So, why do we hear so little about what other nations are doing to stem off this deep recession?

The size of other countries stimulus packages…

Might a little global perspective on the notion of the stimulus package and how countries are going big to fend off a deeper recession help calm nerves?  For instance, France’s economic stimulus package is almost 1.3% of their GDP (or 26 billion dollars).  This stimulus government money is then matched by the private sector with most of the stimulus money being thrown at research and technology investment/development.  The Japanese, on their second stimulus package in their fiscal year, involves $135 dollar cash handouts to all its citizens.  China’s stimulus package is a massive 6% of it’s GDP.

Protectionist or not?

The Christian Science Monitor notes that most countries do not include “Buy Local” clauses in their stimulus plans.  But after a meeting of the G20 last Nov. Russia, India, Brazil, and Vietnam all implemented tariffs aimed at protecting industry at home.  The Ukraine has implemented protectionism.  Southeast Asia appears to be committed to free trade.  From this vantage point, it looks like the world is not completely sold on free trade or protectionism in these tough times.  Much to the chagrin of neo-liberal economists.

More information

Where do you go for more information on the world’s economic stimulus activities?  Yes, the obvious answer is the Internet.  Specifically, I find this interactivemap created by the Brooking’s Institute to be particularly useful (click on the link for the interactive version).

The rural broadband debate & socio-economic discrimination

More NPR comments today.  This one on a piece about broadband access to rural areas and a former FCC economist’s border line discriminatory comments on the subject.  From the NPR article, Michael Katz (the economist in question) states,

“The stimulus package includes $7.2 billion to expand broadband Internet access into “underserved” and rural areas….The notion that we should be helping people who live in rural areas avoid the costs that they impose on society … is misguided…from an efficiency point of view and an equity one.”

Ouch.  It’s interesting to watch the ‘powers that be’ whittle out and marginalize yet another segment of the population in order to save their own skin.  Good times on a Monday.

Yes, there is some work to do on this front.  In 2006, we ranked 12th in the world regarding broadband pervasiveness.  In 2007, we dropped to 15th.  From the Daily Yonder(via the above cited NPR article): The percentage of farmers with high speed Internet.

ProPublica breaks down stimulus package

Despite a lack of public disclosure on the details of the bill (where are you on that one, Barack?), ProPublica has succinctly analyzed what they could and have provided a graphical breakdown of what was cut and changed in all three stages of deliberation on this bill (The House version, the Senate version, and the joint conference version).  At first glance, it looks somewhat balanced though I wish the energy conservation funding would have remained.  Seems like an obvious win…

I heart Paul Krugman

From what I’ve read, this guy is the shit.  He opens up his Op-Ed today in the NY Times with this little political-nerd joke:

What do you call someone who eliminates hundreds of thousands of American jobs, deprives millions of adequate health care and nutrition, undermines schools, but offers a $15,000 bonus to affluent people who flip their houses?  A proud Centrist

Zing.  Take that bipartisanship!  Who does Krugman blame and why?  In his own words,

I blame President Obama’s belief that he can transcend the partisan divide — a belief that warped his economic strategy.

Now, I am all for playing well with others and bridging gaps where one can.  But to let state governments, public education, unemployment aide, etc. stumble because one wants the facade of bi-partisanship starts to pull the president away from some of the more appealing aspects of his campaign promises.  Namely, letting social programs die on the vine in the name of small government.  Last time I checked, that was kind of the point of government; to protect and serve the people.  Sometimes, I think Republicans and neo-conservatives are really anarchists in disguise .

President Obama comes to Indiana

The Associated Press tells us that President Obama is going to participate in a town hall style meeting on Monday 2/9 to discuss our failing economy and how his/our stimulus package will affect daily life.

The Elkhart-Goshen region saw its unemployment rate soar to 15.3 percent in December.