I'll go on the record as a fellow Republican Libertarian (thank you Alan Greenspan, for coining the term, and self-selecting yourself as one) that George Bush has been the most irresponsible Presidential spender in recent memory. Seriously, you need to go back to FDR to find another President who loved signing pork-filled hand-outs into law with as much aplomb (incidentally, Greenspan remarks in his new autobiography that Bush has never taken out his veto-pen to a spending bill, not even one whose trough is overflowing with handouts). Of course now we're paying for this spending malfeasance with a downturn where our Fed -- thanks to a lack of maneuvering room due to the fear of China, Japan and other holders of billions of US debt dumping their dollars if their investment keeps dropping -- only can go so far from a rate cutting perspective without risking a dollar meltdown which would lead to further inflation.
But fear not! There are more steps that the free spending US pols can take to avert a recession (at least as they would have you believe). And that's to run up the debt further with a stimulus package. I won't bore you with the details here, but I'd be curious to get the opinion of Spend Matters readers about their thoughts on whether or not such a stimulus approach will be positive or negative for the overall US economy. Personally, I reckon that such an action will certainly impact procurement organizations by impacting overall supply and demand for commodities -- most likely driving up demand and prices for certain categories -- not to mention potentially having yet a further deflationary impact on the dollar relative to other currencies. But what do you think?
- Jason Busch