Losing sight of the dangers in creating further fiscal stimulus

http://www.jewishworldreview.com | The purpose of the proposed Republican and Democratic tax cuts is to create jobs - more than a million of them, according to the estimates. But, as Warren Buffett recently pointed out about the Bush administration's job-creation estimates, "That's like a manager saying we're going to grow our earnings 20 percent a year. They don't have the faintest idea, in my view, of how many jobs this is going to create. How could they? Economics is not that precise."

Granted, in a typical slowdown, or a typical jobless recovery, broad tax cuts would be a great idea. But this is not a typical jobless recovery. This time, we're emerging from two years of declining business investment, not a contraction in consumer spending. And, while it would be great to cut out taxes on dividends, I doubt that's likely to be much of a short-term stimulus to the economy.

But, philosophically, one of the reasons why I'm concerned about cutting dividend taxes and capital gains is because it means that work will be taxed disproportionately higher than investment. Admittedly, either case can be argued, but that's just where I come down on it.

However, while I'm not enthused about the Republican plans - nor those of the Democrats, for that matter - I realize that we will have a tax cut. Certainly, accelerating individual tax rate cuts is helpful, and raising incentives for small business is helpful. Anytime we can help small business in this country, we should do it. After all, small business creates most of the jobs.

But if goal is job creation, aren't there more direct measures that lawmakers should be considering? If we're trying to create jobs, let's create jobs. Our roads, highways and bridges in this country are in sore need of repair. Investing in our infrastructure would definitely create jobs and would immediately stimulate the economy - and the investment would be lasting.

And shouldn't all of those high-paying CEOs be showing more leadership? Right now, most are tepid - almost milquetoast - in their enthusiasm to invest in the growth of their own companies. Kick 'em in the pants, Mr. president. Tell them it's time to show initiative, not to indulge in caution. If you show the same leadership on this issue that you display in our national security, we could be sure it would work relatively quickly.

But the larger question is, do we even need additional stimulus at this point? I'm not sure we do. With deficits rising this year to more than $400 billion, I believe there is probably already enough fiscal stimulus in the economy. With the fed funds rate at 1.25 percent and high liquidity, we also have ample monetary stimulus. And there are numerous signs that the recovery may be picking up, from stronger corporate earnings to the market's recent performance.

"It's quite possible that we'll think that we didn't need a tax cut when we're looking in the rearview mirror a year and a half from now," says Joel Prakken, chairman of Macroeconomic Advisors. "That's a good reason for making a tax cut temporary. It's an insurance policy to take out, and if you don't need it, it goes away by itself."

Tax cuts - long-term or temporary - carry risks. As Stephen Roach of Morgan Stanley recently wrote, "To the extent that Bush administration policy proposals lead to ever-mounting federal budget deficits, serious new risks might afflict the economy - namely, an exploding balance-of-payments gap, a plunging dollar and rising interest rates."

While rates show no signs of rising from their 40-year lows, our trade deficit is indeed exploding, and the dollar is at a four-year low against the Euro. I hope our policymakers don't lose sight of the dangers in creating further fiscal stimulus. But then, I'm not running for election next year.

Enjoy this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

Lou Dobbs is the anchor and managing editor of CNN's "Lou Dobbs Moneyline." Comment by clicking here.

05/06/03: Optimism is unfashionable, but here's some anyway
04/29/03: Nuclear nightmare
04/22/03: Naysayers ignore signs of economic recovery
04/15/03: Game over--but for whom?
04/08/03: No more fool's games
03/31/03: United States must seriously review foreign economic and political relationships
03/24/03: Delusional Chirac may be a thorn in coalition's side, but new alliances are forming in response to 21st-Century threats without him and UN
03/18/03: Bush critics offer little more than hyperbole
03/11/03: Geopolitical visibility
03/04/03: Freedom: Our best export
02/27/03: Guns, butter and greasing the way
02/18/03: Looking for a silver lining
02/10/03: Space program remains a valuable investment
02/04/03: Hi pal, come back
01/28/03: Bush address a chance to bolster confidence
01/22/03: Here we go again!
01/14/03: Bush's bold bid
01/07/03: The only thing certain is uncertainty
12/30/02: No need to be so negative as new year approaches
12/23/02: NY's AG deserves credit for settlement
12/18/02: Critics of Bush nominees should tone down rhetoric
12/09/02: A lot rides on prez's Treasury pick
12/04/02: A fast fix for corporate credibility?
11/26/02: Urge to merge is hard to resist
11/19/02: Are we really so bad off?
11/12/02: Bush's lucky week bodes well for recovery
11/05/02: Wall Street firms treat investors as fools
10/29/02: Earnings estimates offer some hope
10/22/02: Economy's strength tied to national security
10/17/02: Harvey Pitt, get real!
10/08/02:Are we experiencing the fall before the rise?
10/01/02: Concerns about earnings are justified
09/24/02: Business leaders must abandon stall tactics
09/17/02: Wall Street's reality check
09/12/02: There's no better time for leaders to show resolve