« profile & posts archive

This author has written 377 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

3 responses to “CPD post: Arvanitakis on the success of the stimulus”

  1. Spana

    If you are a capitalist that believes the state should bail out big business then the stimulus was a success. If you are an honest free market supporter then government intervention to prop up capitalism is not okay. A free market is a free market, boom or bust.

    However, if you oppose the growth obsession and look for a world that is not based on extreme greed, consumption and profit seeking then the stimulus was an absolute failure. It used taxpayers’ maoney to hand profits to big business. In doing so it shows that parties like the ALP have as their priority big business.

    The capitalist economy should be allowed to collapse and should be shown up for its disgusting greed and consumption. But I guess the ALP supports greed and consumption. It is wrong, to hand taxpayers’ funds to business to prop up a disgusting economic system.

  2. bmitw

    Actually, the biggest impact, apart from the bank guarantees, of the stimulus was on small business not big business. But even big businesses such as the Harvey Normans will suffer during a recession and shed workers.

    I am a professional accountant and have lost count of the number of claims I have made over the past year or more for the small business tax break, which is but one initiative, but which allowed businesses to upgrade their plant and equipment and at the same time support other businesses.

    At the same time the cash handouts helped support retailers in a big way. Any policy that saves 200,000 jobs can’t be too bad.

  3. Wozza

    I really don’t know what the point of these CPD cross posts is. They are invariably mindless repetition of ALP orthodoxy, preaching to the converted. The fact that they invariably draw a miniscule number of comments suggests that even here they get the attention they deserve. I shouldn’t allow myself to be provoked.

    But this one carries the usual CPD method to such ludicrous extremes, far past even what the 51 economists (whose letter has been aptly described by Milton Von Smith as “a political document that contains absolutely no coherent discussion of sound economic principles”) managed to produce in their subjective wisdom, that I’m afraid I have been.

    Look, no-one argues that there should have been no stimulus. That is an utter straw man. The issue is the size of the stimulus, what it was spent on, and how it was implemented – the waste and mismanagement issue. It doesn’t pass the test on any of these points.

    One, it was designed for an economy that was expected (by its designers, Treasury) to be shrinking at 1% pa, not one growing at well over 2% as it actually was in 2009. It was therefore far too big.

    Two, what it was spent on – school halls, pink batts – produces no lasting positive impact on productivity, or anything much else.

    Three – well, the scale of rorting and waste in the BER and the insulation debacle has been well documented.

    Call this 20/20 hindsight if you will, but even if it is that does not mean that the stimulus was a success. By any objective measure it was far from that.

    And the basis of the letter is anyway a logical fallacy – argument by appeal to authority. Though the Left is believer is a strong believer in authoritarianism, so no doubt that particular fallacy has been expunged from the lexicon.