I’ll weight in on the fiscal stimulus, sort of. My understanding is that there is varying theories amongst economist (and more importantly, politicians) about what the government should do to help an ailing economy. Being a statistician of sorts, I’m going to propose (a few days to late, cause I know Barak is a reader) the WFS Stimulus plan.

I don’t have the details or anything close, but the basic theory is randomization. We sit some economists down to come up with several competing theories, lets say the ten best they can come up with. Then we go find some Dungeons and Dragons players and borrow their ten sided die. We divide up a map of the country (I’ll let someone else decide the best way to do this). For each area we roll the dice to see what kind of fiscal stimulus they get.

So maybe Ohio gets massive spending on infrastructure and Colorado gets tax cuts. Green energy investments go into Texas and Washington gets tax incentives for businesses to hire more employees. Again, I don’t have details, but after two years we look at how things are going and hopefully we have a better idea of what should be done in the future.

Yes, the WFS Economic Stimulus does reek of seperate but equal and some people are going to be pretty pissed about the results. However, I don’t see any reason why properly applying different theories in different areas will work any worse on the whole then improperly applying the theories everywhere. More importantly, it will help policy makers world wide when recessions hit.

This blog sure has gotten dull, I need to get out more.