i was just thinking about the fiscal stimulus and thought is it really necessary. if you think about it it has been done to meet inflation targets. they have deflation and need to plug the deflationary gap. so my point being is it really that bad to have deflation some a short period. it means there is a problem in the free market and the government has stepped in. however if the free market was left alone like in previous times it would progress and recover. the point being which is worse the consequences of deflation for a short or medium term or government debt for a medium to long term. also why does the inflation target have to be meet does it even matter at all. if you think about it why is it two and a half percent and why is that a magic number. each year if we hit that target if there is only one or two years of deflation at two to three percent you are only back where you were two years before. so why is it worse to back track two years than it is to have debt for twenty or thirty. what do you think. is there logic here.
No, it's detrimental to the US as a whole but a great vote buying opportunity for senators , representatives . What do you expect out of a bill that was generated by asking all congressmen and reps (of the correct party) to send in a wish list of pet projects. Also don't be fooled into thinking it's full of repairing infrastructure , building schools etc.
Go to http://www.Recovery.gov I don't think that it is at all detrimental, but slow. It is in fact a patchwork of everything imaginable, only 1/4 of the money has been spent, and about half of the grants have not yet been awarded.
What are you asking...? 1. What is "stimulus" being spent upon currently, or 2. What is "stimulus" in general?