This Is Spinal Tap.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/columnists/jonathan_gurwitz/article/Turning-up-the-volume-on-federal-spending-2252487.php

Dear Mr. Gurwitz,

I read with interest your Nov. 5th op-ed column titled "Turning Up the Volume on Federal Spending." (See link above) As a Spinal Tap fan, I appreciate the Nigel Tufnel reference. That reference serves as a fitting introduction to your commentary on federal spending levels under the Obama Administration. The sophistication of your analysis is about what I'd expect from Nigel. It's not your conclusion I have a problem with, it's how you get there. Perhaps you are correct that deficit spending under the Obama Adminstration could lead to a Greek-style crisis in this country. (Obviously, the long-term debt/deficit problems and structural deficits existed prior to Obama taking office. You don't mention this, but I assume you are aware of this fact.)

In reaching your conclusion, however, you provide anecdotal evidence rather than analysis. Talking points over substance. Let's look at your discussion of the economic stimulus package of 2009, which you call an "$800 billion monstrosity." You note the stimulus package didn't hold unemployment under 8 percent as "stimulus fans" claimed it would, and it paid for iPods for Utah high school students. Therefore, I'm left to conclude, the $800 billion stimulus package was a total failure. You seem to suggest we'd be better off with no stimulus at all, though you don't explicitly offer any solutions of your own. You don't even attempt to address the ramifications of having no stimulus. Economists across the political spectrum agree that increased government spending during an economic downturn increases demand, mitigates the effects of the downturn, and speeds recovery. What would the unemployment rate be without the stimulus? That's up for debate. Was the stimulus package poorly executed? Also up for debate, though you get zero points for telling me about the iPods. Was the stimulus package a simply bad idea, or too large, given the already high deficits? Should the Obama Administration and Congress have let the economy hit bottom on its own, as we'd be better off in the long run despite any negative short term consequences? How would the current debt/deficit picture be different had there been no stimulus? Again, up for debate. But you didn't bother touching on any of these questions.

I'm not claiming to know all the answers. But I know when I see a lazy, mailed-in column bereft of any actual analysis or thought. Perhaps your readers don't want numbers put into perspective, discussion of economic theory even at a basic level, critique of opposing views, or your suggestions of what federal spending should be, what you would cut to get to that level, and why it's preferable to the current level. Maybe they just want a few talking points, some buzzwords, and numbers in a vacuum. If so, that sure makes your job easier.

Regards,
luridtransom