The most sweeping fiscal stimulus in a generation is about to be signed into law by President Obama. It amounts to $787 billion and includes tax incentives, infrastructure projects, renewable energy developments, and payment to state and local authorities.
However, investors appear to be skeptical as indicated by the performance of the markets today for a variety of reasons:
- Some estimate that as much as 75% of the spending will not reach the economy until 2010.
- There are questions as to how many jobs in the United States will actually be created.
- People are uncertain as to how productive the spending bill will be and how much is actually just wasteful "pork."
The most interesting element about the bill is what appears to be missing: a substantial amount of defense spending. Despite disagreements as to whether the Roosevelt infrastructure programs started the road to recovery or merely cushioned impact of the economic downturn of the 1930's, most agree that World War II with its incredible defense spending definitively ended the Great Depression.
Defense spending has a variety of benefits over other forms of fiscal stimulus in the bill:
- It has a direct impact on economic activity in the United States. There is no need to start a trade war with protectionist language of "Buy American" in the bill to insure that jobs produced stay in the United States. Because of national security reasons, defense spending is by law restricted to be domestic in nature.
- Defense spending can be spent much faster by government agencies under the control of the President than a trickle down approach of the other elements in this bill.
- The bill would have attracted much more support from Republicans, who would find it very difficult to oppose spending which they have strongly advocated under President Bush.
- Many economists believe that this bill is merely the first installment of a multi-trillion dollar fiscal stimulus effort that will be required. This will increases the chances of obtaining backing for such an effort
Some may claim that President Obama would have difficulty selling this to his Democratic base. However, one must remember that the President campaigned on a single anti-war issue, withdrawal from Iraq which is largely in process, and has not been anti-military. His base would have hard opposing the defense stimulus if the President made these points in addition to benefits listed above:
- Defense spending is a rather broad category and could be structured to include spending, such as the energy and broad-band initiatives favored by the President. Concern about dependence on foreign oil is a major concern of the military which is already experimenting with bio-fuel for jet fighters. Remember the Internet was originally developed as a communication network for the military and government designed to survive an atomic attack.
- It could also be spent and have a more direct impact on creating jobs. Remember the resources that were utilized for the Manhattan Project.
- It would be easier to enlist bipartisan allies, such as, Senators McCain, Coburn, Webb and Reed to control the pork associated with defense spending and prevent the FreePasser phenomenon from getting worse.
The president will probably call for additional fiscal stimulus in the future and may be forced to include increased defense spending at that point.
Doug Roberts is the Founder and Chief Investment Strategist for ChannelCapitalResearch.com, an independent research firm focusing on investment strategies using the Federal Reserve's impact on the stock prices.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-17-2009 @ 8:12PM
Joel Smith said...
My initial knee jerk reaction to your comments was, "You must be insane." We have gone into deficit spending for the last 7 years to fund a war that we could not afford.
You mention spending on energy and broad-band initiatives. I wouldn't consider those as strictly defense issues and therefore probably would not lump them in that catagory.
2-17-2009 @ 9:10PM
william lindblad said...
Doug:
The single redeeming factor of the great depression was WWII.
You are either uninformed or joking.
The redeeming factor of 1893 (second worst and not by much) was getting to 1910. It was a very rocky road. The unemployment stats are still out there if yo care to check and, by the way, what to do think "LABOR DAY" IS ALL ABOUT?
Better check, it has nothing to do with unions.
2-17-2009 @ 9:23PM
Satur9nine said...
Defense spending has no spillover benefits. All the tanks and missiles made by costly defense spending will simply go into storage and collect dust. That kind of spending will not put the economy back on its feet. Just look at defense spending over the last 20 years, it just keeps going up and up and up, but it isn't helping anyone.
Similarly fixing the so-called crumbling infrastructure sounds nice on paper, but fancy new bridges and roads with fewer potholes don't actually benefit us too much either. Japan made that mistake years ago as reported recently by the New York Times.
Energy independence on the other hand gives us something that is constantly getting consumed and puts dollars that are currently getting shipped to the middle east back into our own economy.
Education spending gives future workers the knowledge they need to start and run businesses. Yes that will take years for that money to come back, but as we speak states are cutting back on education and that will harm us for years too. Millions schools are ready and willing to hire teachers and buy computers.
2-17-2009 @ 9:17PM
John Holman said...
Gee, does that mean we're also missing the 93% tax bracket they imposed during WW2?
That economists all agree that WW2 brought the United States out of the Great Depression is greatly depressing. They need to start over and pay attention this time.
2-17-2009 @ 11:44PM
BHarrison said...
As a 64 y/o Nam veteran and small businessman who is rather hawkish abut protecting American interests throughout the world, I do not believe that "excessive spending for the military industrial complex" is the long term answer to our national economic problems.
We need to invest adequately to maintain our military technology and capability; but military goods are not going to rebuild the manufacturing base for the USA.
As was noted in the news tonight, Obama's plan to create 3.5 million new jobs would basically costs $250,000 per job to create. Would it be more productive to give $50,000.00 to 21.5 million (or $25K to 43 Million) needy Americans who would spend most of that money and get it into the economy in a relatively short time?
Or how about government loans to qualified individuals or coporations to set up manufacturing plants to employ people.
The "trickle down" system of "wealth" has simply NEVER worked very well in the past, has it? The apparent problem is that it is easier to give large sums of money to large companies, than it would be to try to screen and select 3.5 to 43 Million individual Americans . . . that simply takes too long and too much effort to put such a program into place and to qualify and select individuals for low interests loans, etc.
However, funneling the money through large corporations for government projects will be fraught with price gouging, and fraud . . . that is inevitable also. There are no easy answers to all of this.
And .. . just think . . . 9 out of 10 of the CEOs who ran the corporations and orchestrated or oversaw the orchestration of the pyramid and Ponzi schemes, the "derivatives" frauds, and other frauds that resulted in the economic melt down of our national economy are STILL running those corporations. . . . Does that make rational sense to anyone? And now this government "bailout" monies are being invested in those SAME FAILING CORPORATIONS?
A definition of "insanity" is: "Repeatedly doing the same things in the same ways; and expecting different results." Isn't that basically what Cogress is doing with the "bailout monies"?
2-18-2009 @ 5:01AM
Shelly said...
Apparently this administration does not believe they are able to solve the economic crisis. They will spend 800 billion dollars and all they know how to say is its going to get much worse. Theyve been saying that for months ( Well before the elections even) and will continue that line for years and years no doubt. Wall street is listening to Obama and Geithner and believe in what they are telling America. Stocks dropped to new lows in response to the presidents complete lack of faith in his plan and this country. Tomorrow and the next day and 1,000 days to follow we can look forward to the same negative outlook from this administration..
At a time when we need strong leadership and optimistic people in power we have people who are confused and only know how to scare everyone worse then they already are.
2-18-2009 @ 5:38AM
Richard said...
Everyone is an expert....There is nothing we can do now..Let's see how this 'Stimulus' will help get this country going....In my humble, expert opinion..., it simply will not work as shown by History alone.