人気ブログランキング |

the grass is greener, the snow is whiter

きょうも、雪です。

The Byrds が続けて流れています。I Knew I'd Want You の色んなヴァージョンです。
まあ、今の私はGene Clark モードではないのです。
ブルーグラス・モードです。

昨日、Bert Reynolds の "Smokey and the Bandit" (1977)を見ました。学生時代に何度も見ている映画です。カーター時代の南部の復権を象徴するような映画の一つだったのかなと。
スタント・マン上がりのHal Needham 作品、共演がカントリー歌手のJerry Reedです。

南部らしいジョークは、昔も感じたのですが、30年前に見たときはカントリーにしか思えなかった音楽が今の感覚ではそうでもないなと思った次第。バック・ビートがきいていて。
Eagles の方向転換、ABBを初めとするサザン・バンドの人気興隆とその反動。そしてレーガン時代という流れですか。

さて、先日のU.S. v. Textron の訴訟の記事について取り上げましたが、判決文がみつかりました。

じっくり検討してみるべき点が多々ありそうです。

かつてニクソンが「われわれは、今やみなケインジアンだ」といったことがありましたが、アメリカも絶対的市場神信仰を捨てつつあるのか。
新政権の大幅な財政拡大政策が明らかになってきました。
In Effort to Build Support, Obama Details Stimulus Plan

By PETER BAKER
Published: January 24, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Obama, seeking to broaden the appeal of his signature initiative, said Saturday that a proposed $825 billion package of spending programs and tax breaks was crucial not only to turn around the economy but also to rebuild the nation for a new era.

According to the report, the Obama plan would double the generating capacity of renewable energy over three years, enough to power six million American homes. It would retrofit two million homes and 75 percent of all federal buildings to better protect against the weather, saving low-income homeowners an average of $350 a year in utility costs and the government $2 billion a year.

The White House also envisions using loan guarantees and other financial support to leverage $100 billion in private sector investment in so-called clean energy projects over three years. The plan would lay 3,000 miles of new or upgraded transmission wires for a new electric grid.

The plan would help 8.5 million Americans keep health care coverage by providing workers who lose insurance with tax credits to pay for continuing coverage under the federal law known as Cobra, and by expanding Medicaid coverage for low-income Americans who lack access to Cobra. The Medicaid formula would be adjusted to protect 20 million Americans whose coverage might be in jeopardy because of state budget shortfalls.

The plan would modernize 10,000 schools, improve security at 90 ports and build 1,300 wastewater projects. It would bolster Pell Grants to help seven million students and offer a new tax credit for four million college students. And it would increase food stamp benefits for 30 million Americans and increase Social Security benefits $450 for 7.5 million disabled and elderly people.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/us/politics/25obama.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
古くなった公共施設を整備し、環境にやさしいプロジェクト、住宅に助成、それと、失業により医療保険がなくなった人たちに対するメディケアに対して支出、さらに学校の整備というような感じですね。

当然、共和党は反対というわけです。
Republicans Are Resistant to Obama’s Stimulus Plan

By SHARON OTTERMAN
Published: January 25, 2009
Republicans plan to test President Barack Obama’s commitment to bipartisanship as his $825 billion stimulus package heads to the floor of the House of Representatives this week, with the House Republican leader saying Sunday morning that many in his party will vote no unless there are significant changes to the plan.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26talkshow.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
8,250億ドルの財政出動の3分の2が公共投資だというのが気に入らない。
減税すべきだと。

クルーグマンは当然、反対するというわけです。
Bad Faith Economics

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: January 25, 2009
As the debate over President Obama’s economic stimulus plan gets under way, one thing is certain: many of the plan’s opponents aren’t arguing in good faith. Conservatives really, really don’t want to see a second New Deal, and they certainly don’t want to see government activism vindicated. So they are reaching for any stick they can find with which to beat proposals for increased government spending.

The point is that nobody really believes that a dollar of tax cuts is always better than a dollar of public spending. Meanwhile, it’s clear that when it comes to economic stimulus, public spending provides much more bang for the buck than tax cuts — and therefore costs less per job created (see the previous fraudulent argument) — because a large fraction of any tax cut will simply be saved.

This suggests that public spending rather than tax cuts should be the core of any stimulus plan. But rather than accept that implication, conservatives take refuge in a nonsensical argument against public spending in general.

Finally, ignore anyone who tries to make something of the fact that the new administration’s chief economic adviser has in the past favored monetary policy over fiscal policy as a response to recessions.

It’s true that the normal response to recessions is interest-rate cuts from the Fed, not government spending. And that might be the best option right now, if it were available. But it isn’t, because we’re in a situation not seen since the 1930s: the interest rates the Fed controls are already effectively at zero.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/opinion/26krugman.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
話は、簡単で、通常ならFRBが金利政策で対応すべきであるけれど、今はそれがゼロ金利になってしまってもう意味がない。
政府が景気刺激策をとるとして減税をすべきか公共投資をすべきかという選択しかないが、公共投資のほうが効果があると断じています。

先日のコラムのタイトルもそうでしたが、クルーグマンはロック・ファンかな。ECとWinwood のバンドの名前を思い出しました。

景気刺激の前に、三年後の増税を論じているどこかの国は、やっぱり変です。

アメリカ人は別に宗旨変えをしたのではなく、何が今、必要かと考えているだけでしょう。

最大の問題は、アメリカが今回作る大きな借金を返すのは誰なのかということですが。
by nk24mdwst | 2009-01-26 11:56 | 租税法(アメリカ)


<< pay as you eat,... wasting time >>