This is the opposite of stimulus.
What about "investing in the industries of the future"?
Calling government spending "investment" does not make it investment any more than calling spending "stimulus" makes it stimulate anything.
What would lead anyone to think that politicians have some magic way of knowing what the industries of the future are? The Obama administration has repeatedly "invested" in the bankruptcies of the present, such as Solyndra.
Using lofty words to obscure tawdry realities extends beyond the White House.
Referring to the Federal Reserve's creation of hundreds of billions of new dollars out of thin air as "quantitative easing" makes it seem as if this is some soothing and esoteric process.
It amounts to nothing more than printing more money.
Debasing the value of money by creating more of it is nothing new. Irresponsible governments have done this for thousands of years.
It is a way to take people's wealth from them without having to openly raise taxes.
Inflation is the most universal tax of all.
All the pretty talk about how tax rates will be raised only on "the rich" hides the ugly fact:
The poorest people in the country will see the value of their money decline just like everyone else's - and at the same rate - when the government creates more money and spends it.
If you have $100 and, after inflation follows from "quantitative easing," that $100 dollars will only buy what $80 bought before . . .
That is the same as if the government had taxed away a fifth of your money and spent it.
But it is not the same politically as long as gullible people don't look beyond words to the reality that inflation taxes everybody - the poorest as well as the richest.
Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.