The economic stimulus plan presented by House Democrats this month calls for $37 billion of high-tech spending in the following areas: computerizing medical records, creating smarted technical grids and spending high-speed Internet access in rural and undeserved areas.
Obama's transition team asserted that the investment in those three areas could produce more than 900,000 jobs in the first year alone. These jobs, according to John Irons from the Economic Policy Institute, would range from the implementation to the adoption of these technologies locally, spanning a spectrum of skills and income levels, in addition to not being outsourced offshore.
Advocates say that the appeal goes beyond the stimulus, building a platform for productivity gains and long-term growth. The high-tech investments can be the equivalent of federal financing for highways in the 1950s, they say, which fostered the growth of businesses such as automakers and retail chains.
Critics argue that while these projects are worthy of the long term, they should not be part of the recovery plan. The problem is that not every investment in the technology field fits the standard of the initiatives that are to be included in the plan. The standard, according to Blair Levin, former technology advisor to Obama's transition team, is that the initiative be “timely, targeted and temporary,” while also creating jobs.
Stanford economist, Robert E. Hall says that the government should not pour money into those areas, as competent suppliers would be in short supply and get increased incomes, benefiting mostly individuals companies, rather than the economy as a whole.
Substantial investment in technology is clearly necessary to keep the USA competitive. But do you think it belongs in the recovery plan?
Source information courtesy of NYT.com
No comments:
Post a Comment