Economic Stimulus Plan: I Beg To Differ

President Bush has proposed a $500 tax rebate to every American that pays taxes in order to help stimulate the economy. If you haven’t noticed, the economy has been in the “dumps” of late and it doesn’t appear to be improving. I would venture to even say that the economy may in fact be in a recession. Granted, I am not an economist, but the signs are rather obvious to any American that follows the news or has capital invested in the market. The slumping real estate market is probably the best indicator. Even the chairman of the Federal Reserve has signaled to Congress that something must be done, but I don’t think that $500 to every tax paying American is the answer.

The question that you have to ask yourself is what would you do with an extra $500? In today’s world there isn’t much that you can do with $500 except pay down debt. I venture to assert that a majority of Americans will in fact pay down some of their debt with the extra cash. I’ll be the first to tell you that I will be trying to cut some of my debt with the extra cash. It is a general rule of thumb; at least in the economic world that paying down debt will not stimulate the economy in the way that the president hopes. Think of it this way: if you paid off a credit card with the extra money, what have you bought? $500 is simply not enough to force more demand in the market for much of anything, hence the flaw with the plan.

So, what should the government do? The president does not have that much control over the economy, at least the amount of control that the media would have you believe. Nor does the Federal Reserve Board, as they technically do not lower interest rates, they simply recommend lowering interest rates. In this case the “Fed” should recommend a drastic lowering of interest rates if they wish to stimulate the economy in a more immediate fashion. I’m not talking about quarter or half points, I’m talking in the way of whole points. The exact number is debatable, but I do believe that it would breathe a breath of fresh air into an economy starving for air. The point is that it would quell investor’s fears on Wall Street where the recovery would start and then so on throughout the economy.

Never Underestimate The Predictability of Stupidity

A few weeks back I discussed the “price of our actions” in regard to the terrible incident at the San Francisco Zoo on Christmas Day where one person was killed by a captive Siberian Tiger. But today police released a report that said one of the other two victims of the tiger was intoxicated and agitating the beast while it was in its enclosure. After reading the report, three thoughts came to mind: One, these creatures are a bit smarter than we like to think they are; two, never underestimate the predictability of stupidity; three, more safeguards are needed to protect imbeciles from captive predators. Isn’t a zoo a place where we can enjoy these animals in a controlled environment for both the animal and us?

As one can tell, I am a bit “fired up” over this event and for good reason. No, I do not belong to PITA, as I believe their ideology and goals are farfetched and extreme. But on the other hand, I unlike some people have a healthy respect for nature’s creatures and the power that some of them possess. This leads into my first thought on the matter: our underestimation of many creature’s intelligence. If the report is true and at least one person was taunting the tiger, isn’t it a bit surprising that the “beast” explicitly remembered who these people were? Then it methodically “hunted” them down. How do we react when we are taunted? Typically we try to silence the individuals through tact or force. Maybe the tiger was reacting just as it should- in its self defense. It obviously felt threatened and it dealt with the situation in the only way it knew how: fight or flight. It obviously chose to fight. Keep that in mind next time you are on a trip in the great outdoors.

Secondly, one must never underestimate the predictability of stupidity. The first mind boggling question is who goes to a zoo drunk? It is a fact that alcohol impairs judgment and a variety of other cognitive faculties, so why would one choose to go to a zoo to taunt the animals? If you have visited a zoo, there is no doubt that we have all tapped on the glass or the bars of an enclosure to get an animal’s attention. But it would appear as if at least one individual went a bit overboard and chose the wrong animal. They do not call them “big cats” for nothing; any cat classified in that category is more than able to rip a human apart without thinking about it. The prey they game in the wild is far bigger and stronger than us, hence they have to be bigger and stronger than their prey in order to survive. I don’t know about you, but I am not about to go one on one with a cat that was at least 300+ pounds of pure muscle.

Finally, it should be the responsibility of zoos to keep their guests safe. As mentioned previously, I am not a fan of zoos, but they aren’t going away anytime soon, so it would be logical to properly enclose the creatures in proper facilities. In theory, a vast majority of creatures found in zoos shouldn’t have to be shielded from everyone by giant iron bars. But when individuals intentionally tease these creatures, well they ruin it for all of us. Granted, the facilities zoos use is dependent upon that particular zoo’s ideology and relationship with their animals. Never the less, there should be a standard that all zoos should have to abide by. Some places even walk their big cats around while guests are present in order to give the guests the full experience. I don’t see anything wrong with that, just as long as morons do not tease them.