Reply #212: Such a silly comment on so many levels.

[stevenleser]

First, we have a vastly different economy than the one that existed in 1930-1931. Its components are not the same, the services sector accounts for 67% of the money generated by the economy and 3/4ths of the jobs in the economy. In 1930, manufacturing was a huge percentage of the economy.

Second, if we actually look at the stimulus, its hard to make the argument that the money was directed at the "FIRE" sector. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009#Provisions_of_the_Act

Yes, there was $12 Billion spent on "Housing", but spending on "Housing" is not the same as spending it to "restore the well being of the Real Estate sector"

Housing
Total: $12.7 billion

$4 billion to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for repairing and modernizing public housing, including increasing the energy efficiency of units.
$2.25 billion in tax credits for financing low-income housing construction
$2 billion for Section 8 housing rental assistance
$2 billion to help communities purchase and repair foreclosed housing
$1.5 billion for rental assistance and housing relocation
$510 million for the rehabilitation of Native American housing
$200 million for helping rural Americans buy homes
$130 million for rural community facilities
$100 million to help remove lead paint from public housing

Finally, saying the "Finance, insurance and Real Estate" sectors health is "everybody else's disease" is simply not true. If it were true, that would mean any time that those sectors were doing well, the rest of us would be doing badly. I think most expansions have seen those sectors doing well at the same time most if not all sectors were doing well. I think this is just an author who has thrown unproven assertions out there.