A new New Deal?

[bascule]

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/07/us/politics/07radio.html?pagewanted=all

 

Obama plans a "vast infrastructure program, which also includes work on schools, sewer systems, mass transit, electrical grids, dams and other public utilities. The green jobs would include various categories, including jobs dedicated to creating alternative fuels, windmills and solar panels; building energy efficient appliances, or installing fuel-efficient heating or cooling systems." It would also "expand broadband Internet access, to make government buildings more energy efficient, to improve information technology at hospitals and doctors’ offices, and to upgrade computers in schools."

 

He wants to get the legislation through Congress before taking office, as well.

 

Personally I think this sounds awesome, especially in the wake of 2 million jobs lost in the past year... but I'm sure sentiments about the New Deal are mixed around here.

[npts2020]

I think the new "New Deal" ought to be automating our transportation system and powering it with wind and solar energy. That would provide millions of jobs for a long time. If there was an economics forum it might be interesting to delve into the monetary implications of something like this.

[Pangloss]

I think it makes a lot of sense. These aren't unconditional bailouts or income redistribution programs, they're actually serving a purpose and helping rebuild the economy at the same time. It's going to mean continued deficit spending in the short term, but the smart money says that that's more important than balancing the budget within the next couple of years -- we'll get to that shortly.

 

The other thing I liked last week was the suggestion from the Obama camp (and outright statements from Obama himself) that entitlement programs, not just discretionary spending (i.e. defense) will (not can, *will*) come under scrutiny and face major cuts. Smart stuff that makes sense, we'll keep. Stuff we put in just because we could afford it will be cut.

 

Bear in mind that sort of thing has never happened. Ever. If he were to accomplish actual cuts to actual non-discretionary spending programs, that would be a serious accomplishment.

 

Of course in theory that includes things like NSF, NASA, education, etc. But he says the process will be an intelligent one, and beneficial programs will be kept.

Edited December 8, 2008 by Pangloss

[Dak]

hmm... is that photo an allusion to roosevelt please?

[Mr Skeptic]

Looks that way, but I don't know where the matching Roosevelt picture is.

[john5746]

I think his popularity will take a hit, people are not going to like cuts. As usual, he will find it far easier and popular to run deficits. He is already preparing to do just that. I wonder if he will start to speak more positively after taking office. Saying it will get worse before it gets better will keep everyone on the sidelines, so he doesn't want to keep saying that for too long.

[bascule]

Looks that way, but I don't know where the matching Roosevelt picture is.

 

Here:

 

[Riogho]

Of course in theory that includes things like NSF, NASA, education, etc. But he says the process will be an intelligent one, and beneficial programs will be kept.

 

I remember reading that NASA actually was good!

 

NASA gets plenty of criticism. Some is deserved; some things are out of the space agency's control. Some argue NASA needs more funding, some say NASA doesn't manage the funds they have very well. Nonetheless, current estimates say for every dollar we spend on the space program, the U.S. economy receives about $8 of economic benefit. That's an excellent rate of return, whether we're in good economic times or bad.

 

http://www.universetoday.com/2008/10/01/reflections-of-nasa-at-50/

[bascule]

As usual, he will find it far easier and popular to run deficits. He is already preparing to do just that.

 

It's not as if he had the chance to author the 2009 federal budget.

 

Also I expect the size of the deficits to decrease in conjunction with increased taxation (on the upper classes).

[john5746]

It's not as if he had the chance to author the 2009 federal budget.

 

Also I expect the size of the deficits to decrease in conjunction with increased taxation (on the upper classes).

 

Oh, I agree and then some. Obama has been handed a huge mess. I just think that after an initial honeymoon phase, people will begin to blame him for all the mess. It will be far easier to just spend than to make cuts, especially with congress.

 

 

Also I expect the size of the deficits to decrease in conjunction with increased taxation (on the upper classes).

 

Let's see if he goes forward with his original taxation plans. I think he will, but we'll see.

[Pangloss]

I remember reading that NASA actually was good!

 

Obama made statements in support of NASA in the later stages of the campaign, after earlier criticizing it and suggesting cut-backs. I think NASA is relatively safe, but they could face some sort of cut-back, probably combined with increased support for private space initiatives.

[iNow]

Obama made statements in support of NASA in the later stages of the campaign, after earlier criticizing it and suggesting cut-backs. I think NASA is relatively safe, but they could face some sort of cut-back, probably combined with increased support for private space initiatives.

 

Obama's choice of Chu for energy reinforces his attention to the science, but it seems that there has been some friction between his transition team and existing NASA managment:

 

 

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_space_thewritestuff/2008/12/nasa-has-become.html

NASA administrator Mike Griffin is not cooperating with President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team, is obstructing its efforts to get information and has told its leader that she is “not qualified” to judge his rocket program, the Orlando Sentinel has learned.

 

In a heated 40-minute conversation last week with Lori Garver, a former NASA associate administrator who heads the space transition team, a red-faced Griffin demanded to speak directly to Obama, according to witnesses.

 

In addition, Griffin is scripting NASA employees and civilian contractors on what they can tell the transition team and has warned aerospace executives not to criticize the agency’s moon program, sources said.

 

 

 

IIRC, DH commented on some of this way back during the primaries when Obama was still battling with Clinton.

Edited December 11, 2008 by iNow

[Pangloss]

Oof. That's depressing. Thanks for passing that along.

 

I think NASA had better choose its battles carefully. They certainly have many fans and admirers, and deservedly so, but they're clearly not going to win any kind of political or public relations fight with this administration.