The AP reports (HT: Drudge):
chief executive has told him the company will rehire some laid-off
workers if the stimulus bill passes.
The heavy equipment maker
announced more than 22,000 job cuts last month as it scales back
production amid the economic slowdown.
During a visit to a transportation construction site just outside Washington in Springfield, Va., on Wednesday, Obama urged Congress to pass the bill.
The House and Senate are working out differences between competing versions of the legislation.
Obama said Caterpillar's CEO has told him that if the stimulus bill passes he would be able to rehire some of those employees.
Obama is to speak with some of those workers on Thursday when he visits a Caterpillar manufacturing plant in Peoria, Ill.
Just a few disturbing aspects of this brief story:
1. A CEO tells the President what he wants to hear. Wonder if that will help steer some business Caterpillar's way. 2. The President quotes a CEO's claim as if it's a fact. 3. If it turns out to be true, and if Caterpillar does indeed hire some workers it has laid off, that's a reason to support the stimulus bill. No mention of any costs that might be paid to get those workers hired. It's magic! The government spends my money and yours and the economy recovers. The workers who will not get hired because our taxes are going to be higher in the future go unseen.
Share
{ 44 comments }
Do you believe in magic?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBVOYkhNb1o&feature=related
Imagine how many jobs would be created if we destroyed all the heavy equipment that Caterpiller makes. Then some people get employed in Caterpillar's factories, and yet more people are employed in construction. Everyone's a winner.
Creating work is what good economies do, right? The more work we have to do to maintain the same lifestyle, the better?
It's amazing how easily journalists and politicians ignore the other side of the equation.
I'm beginning to think Russ doesn't accept Obama as the Messiah and hasn't faith in The One's ability to perform miracles.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Caterpillar a heavy exporter? And isn't there supposed to be some protectionism stuck in the stimulus bill somewhere? So if our trading partners retaliate with their own protectionism, won't Caterpillar end up having to lay off even more workers because of this bill?
tw – never ask for logic from anti-capitalists and protectionists. They operate on the currency of emotion.
Yes, sure, that's good for Caterpillar and the employees who may get hired back. I still don't see how that changes my incentives in any way that I might increase my spending.
second the motion lee kelly.
as a matter of fact i think i'm going to go around and just start smashing windows wherever i can. you know, create jobs asap.
i'll begin with my block, because charity does begin at home, you know and will slowly expand to the entire neighborhood. by the time i'm done i can always start over at the beginning again thus continuously stimulating my neighborhoods economy.
of course i wouldn't do so usually. im not a sociopath. but as we all know these are not usual times. these are extraordinary times which require extraordinary measures and destruction of property is the quickest and easiest way to create jobs (or create a perception of creating jobs) and by god, its extraordinary.
oh, the glazier will have to be from around the neighborhood too.
Mezzanine, Lee agrees with you. He was being sarcastic.
Qualification: Maybe he doesn't agree with you. That was hasty assumption.
However, he is being sarcastic.
I'm beginning to think Russ doesn't accept Obama as the Messiah and hasn't faith in The One's ability to perform miracles.
Posted by: Methinks
Me neither. I just glad he's a brilliant professor and scholar of the constitution and not a dolt like the one we had "running" the country (world) into the ground these last 8 years.
"I've abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system,to make sure the economy doesn't collapse."
George W Bush
Even better: by the time the "future" arrives, chances are there will be Republicans in power again, and they can take the blame!
What I find most disturbing in Obama's comments is his implicit support for the Buy America clause.
And the law of conspicuous benefits and hidden costs exerts its ineorable effects again.
Disturbing, but not surprising, Ben.
ok, I admit it muirduck is right. FDR cured the Great Depression and big government works. Happy now?
You know one reaches a point where there is no more strength to keep fighting the socialists. They win.
I wonder if America ever had free market capitalism?
test
ok, I admit it muirduck is right. FDR cured the Great Depression and big government works. Happy now?
Posted by: Mezzanine
POINT to such a post-FDR disaster… there were none of this scale right up through the Reagan /Clinton era. Yeah I am right.
What's worse? Politicians meddling in business? or CEOs meddling in politics?
Muirducks posting on this site is far worse then any catastrophe.
"or CEOs meddling in politics?"
Change that to rent-seeking CEOs.
Muirgeo is myopic. If there is "empirical evidence" that eliminating a certain section of society ( based on sex, race, religion, IQ, profession, or any other criteria ) will improve the well being of the rest of the populace, he will be all for genocide. He is so utilitarian. Funny thing is, all his utilitarian arguments are not really utilitarian.
Muir,
You have an – anti-libertarian blog based on the comments section of Cafe Hayak??? That's so sad.
Actually, all the leftists I know are like Muirdiot – even the ones that are infinitely smarter than him (I know – not a high bar). They are extremely religious in their devotion to Democrats and whoever their messianic leader du jour is but ream the religious right for being religious. They fall all over themselves to praise and support idiotic policies when undertaken by their messiahs but rip apart a Republican for undertaking the EXACT same policies.
We just sit back and laugh at the True Believers. You just can't reason with that much stupid.
They fall all over themselves to praise and support idiotic policies when undertaken by their messiahs but rip apart a Republican for undertaking the EXACT same policies.
That's because intentions matter to them above all else.
I don't think so, Sam. Often, the intentions are exactly the same. Are Obama's stated intentions to "right the economy" different from Bush's?
I think it's blind stupidity. Their team is tops no matter what, logic be damned.
But if we're talking about dumb policies like minimum wage and socialized medicine, then I agree that it's all about intentions for them even when they're smart enough to understand the logical outcome of those policies.
ok, muirgeo, i listened. now you listen, the speaker himself admits that the factories drew people in from the countryside. Why, it sounds as if the workers thought that this would be a better opportunity then they had whereever they came from. The speaker mentions at one point "the half starved children" in these factory towns. Consider that those children would never be seen in the countryside because they would have been fully starved, they would not have been able to survive at all. Of course it was a marginal existence, but this was the very beginning of mass production, this was the first move up for standards of living and out of poverty and subsistence for only the fewest and the strongest.
You have to remember that the natural state of the world is abject misery and poverty, and billions of people still live that way to this very day, the hard scrapple existence right on the raggedy edge. We are living on the wrong side of the garden of eden, as they say, condemned to scratch the dirt for food. Capitalism and production and economic growth and harmonies are still brand new out of the box, considering the long history of dirt scratching that humanity has experienced. We're still trying to get it right, we are still trying to make progress onward and upward. The well meaning government interventions you support, as sincerely as you support them, are misguided and take us in the wrong direction, away from the upward trend. Production is hard, progress is messy, it's chaotic, and I guess it can be repulsive to some. But poverty, starvation, disease, and the idea of 6 billion people never even coming into existence because capitalism (the only way we have found so far for effectively overcoming the aforementioned afflictions on the human condition) was smothered in its crib, that is repulsive to me.
muirgeo @ 02-11-09 @ 4:17:36 PM
"Me neither. I just glad he's a brilliant professor and scholar of the constitution and not a dolt like the one we had "running" the country (world) into the ground these last 8 years."
The world???
Please treat yourself for Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Sic S.C., muirgeo!
Here's muirgeo and Gil
Source warning: this "CEO" is on Obama's economic team…literally. Doesn't that create a slight conflict of interest?
We just sit back and laugh at the True Believers. You just can't reason with that much stupid.
Posted by: Methinks
Yeah, but ultimately you operate in OUR world not the Dickensonian one you dream of forcing onto society. Yeah so go ahead and laugh and make all the money you need but make sure you do so knowing you need to follow the rules of society. Oh and allow your self to be your own True Believer. If the Randian thoughts of yourself as a self-made person give you comfort then believe. Do not trouble your mind with the details just believe and be happy.
ok, muirgeo, i listened. now you listen,
Scott,
Lovely try, but listening to you is not enough. One must also have the basic intelligence to understand what you're saying. Muirdiot's single digit IQ will never allow his pea brain to wrap itself around your post. Marcus' cartoon is the perfect description of this half-wit.
Actually Methinks, I should have said: "Intentions are SLL that matters to them."
All you have to do is put the "right" intentions behind the guns and all will be right with the world.
DOH! I'm pretty certain i did not hit post three times.
George,
We get that you prefer the "progressive" interpretation.
I don't know why you come here, as it is clear to me that you have no genuine contribution to make to the Austrian perspective.
In my view, the "progressive" perspective on economics is superficial and, when it does go to any depth, is based on flawed premises and therefore erroneous in content.
Yes, the progressive meme is dominant in politics, as it has been for about a century, and uses its power and willingness to lie to maintain its dominance.
That "progressives" have blamed the current mess on libertarian ideas is notable evidence of this conclusion. The falsity of such a premise is glaring and in that regard, you remind me of my five year old who refuses to hear attempts to explain the reality if it does not accord with her WIWTH (what I want to hear) filter.
It appears obvious to me that the most successful politicians are accomplished at facile dissembling and, to some degree, sociopathic, to boot, yes, even your beloved democrats. Let's call them third party sociopaths.
In any case, the proprietors of this site and most of its regulars are in apposite to the "progressive" interpretation and we do not buy your attempts to bolster that interpretation for a second.
If you enjoy the popular and official interpretations of history, so be it. But if you are not willing to hear other interpretations, then there is little point in discussing them with you.
Well said, Sam. I'll second it.
Sam,
I come here because the libertarian perspective is the most intriguing alternative to what I believe. Again, I voted for the libertarian candidate in 1996 and Republicans all before that.
At this point I've convinced myself it would be less efficient, less egalitarian, ruthless, more corrupt and would ultimately decrease the average persons liberty and increase human suffering. That's not to say that the current system which is prone to promotion of dependency is perfect.
Ultimately I would argue as Marx did that free market capitalism is scientifically destined to failure simply because of the massive inequality it would result in leaving behind huge masses who ultimately would not tolerate the system. (and no dumbasses (not you Sam) that doesn't make me a marxist).
In fact, humanity has already, in my opinion , crossed that bridge and I can't see why a reasonable person would think we should return to the methods of the past.
Sure they may have back then ultimately been a critical stage in human social evolution but why would some one think what worked then would work now when the nature of humanity and society has changed so dramatically.
Muirdiot: Ultimately I would argue as Marx did…
Muirdiot: …that doesn't make me a marxist
Thank you for that bit of comedy. I completely agree with you. Arguing as Hitler argued that Jews are the scourge of the earth does not make me an anti-semite and agreeing with David Duke does not make me a White Supremest.
Hands down, Muirdiot, your stupidity provides for the funniest comments on the blog! Keep it up, clown. We need the belly laughs.
Sure, Your brain is cast in concrete. that is not news to any of us. Your posts, without exception, are a regurgitation of the Socialist manifesto. I asked you to provide examples of 10 critical areas where you think the progressives are dumb as a brick. You couldn't. Not one of your thoughts are independent or original.
Given that, I wonder what makes you lurk here all day?
"At this point I've convinced myself it would be less efficient, less egalitarian, ruthless, more corrupt and would ultimately decrease the average persons liberty and increase human suffering."
-Muir
You may have CONVINCED yourself, but the facts show otherwise. Take 5 minutes and compare the latest Index of Economic Freedom with the latest corruptions perception index and you'll find that list of the top 20 in terms of economic freedom is "convincingly" similar to the top 20 in terms of corruption (in this case a lack thereof).
How about this? Contrast:
Hong Kong/India
UK/France
South Korea/North Korea
Ireland/Spain
Chile/Venezuela
"In fact, humanity has already, in my opinion , crossed that bridge and I can't see why a reasonable person would think we should return to the methods of the past.
Sure they may have back then ultimately been a critical stage in human social evolution but why would some one think what worked then would work now when the nature of humanity and society has changed so dramatically."
-Muir
Hum, You've stated many times in the past that free markets have never existed. In another post you say the US economy was well regulated through the 70s. So by "methods of the past" are you talking about Soviet Communism? Fascist socialism maybe? China under Mao?
Muir, you are a riddle. I'll give you that…