Mayor's stimulus idea is a bad one

Timing, appearances, principles, political wisdom, equity and the potential of setting bad precedent all argue against Mayor Chris Beutler’s proposal to subsidize the purchase of vacant, brand-new houses with public money. 

The proposal, Beutler said, will create economic benefits that will ripple through the economy, not only helping put construction workers on the job but also aiding local lending institutions, suppliers of construction material and other related businesses.

It is a flawed idea, no matter how well intended.

The timing is lousy, coming as it does when the mayor is proposing cutting 45 jobs, slashing a half-million dollars from the public bus system and raising the property tax rate.

Yes, homebuilding is in a downturn. But today’s economic distress reaches beyond that important industry.

One must wonder, how much good can be done by awarding $1,000 in public money to 610 lucky new homebuyers? Do the math. A thousand bucks is a small slice of the modern mortgage. And when it comes to the larger picture, hoping to reinvigorate the economy with 610 checks is like trying to empty the ocean with a cup.

Other businesses are hurting, too. Consider, for example, those women and men who sell pickups and full-size sedans. Couldn’t their business use a boost? The government should not grease one wheel at the expense of others.

Darkening clouds on the economic horizon can be scary. And when times grow hard, all sorts of odd ideas bubble up like swamp gas. 

With sympathy to those whose livelihoods are diminished by a local surplus of new houses, it is simply unwise for the city and its citizens to underwrite the mayor’s plan.

We don’t object to the idea of keeping some of the city’s old special-assessment money for one-shot opportunities — public projects with a public purpose — that could score big for the local economy.

This is not one of them.