Tag Archives: economists

Obama Administration Is Sending Us Into An Economic Dark Age

Bookmark and Share    On Tuesday, in a televised interview, President Obama’s top political economic advisor, Larry Summers, unintentionally explained why the current liberal regime in Washington, D.C. is setting the United States up for a prolonged economic dark age.

Summers told Fox Business News that the administration’s economic agenda and their planned rate hikes on Americans earning $250,000 a year, will strengthen the economy and he did so by claiming that

“Almost all economists who studied these things have that kind of view,”.

Not only was Larry Summer’s claim an exaggeration, it was a downright lie.

The American Economic Association has 22,000 registered, professional members. More than 90% of them oppose tax increases and approve tax cuts. But liberal spinmiesters like Summers claim that “almost all economists” have the view that increasing taxes on those who are investing in the sustainable free market and fueling it and our economy , should be penalized and have the government take more of their money and do the investing instead of them.

Summers is not an economic advisor, he is an economic terrorist who is blatantly trying to plunder the source of America’s real economic survival……, the overburdened American consumer. What Summers fails to point out is that by taking more money from those who earn $250,000 a year we are insuring that these people, the ones who invest in business and industry, the ones who start up small business and create jobs, will have less to invest and less to start those business or keep them going with.

The economic strategy of Larry Summers and the Obama regime, is not an economic strategy at all. It is a political strategy. Democrats know that there is mileage to be gained by continuing to wage class warfare. They know that middle and lower class Americans who are hurting will always have a bit of resentment for those who are wealthy or relatively wealthy. Last year, the New York Times reported that 74% of all Americans favor taxes on people who make more than $250.000 a year. They also reported that in the same poll 51% of all Americans would support those same higher taxes even if it “hurts the economy”. Even if it hurts the economy!

Well that is exactly what the Obama regime is doing……hurting, not helping the economy. And they are willingly doing so because they know that they can get, even some quiet support, from those who want to ‘stick it’ to those who are better off than them. The economic policies of President Obama are not based on the future prosperity of this nation. It is based on trying to maintain a 50 plus 1 percent electoral strategy that allows them to be competitive in elections. This is not leadership, it’s cowardice. This is not policy, it’s politics.

It works like this.

Back in 2003, when liberals were trying to oppose the Bush tax cuts, they obtained signatures from 400 economists who opposed the tax cuts and then ran with headlines like

“”Economists Blast Bush Tax-Cut Proposal” and “Bush Tax-Cuts Come Under Fire from Economists.”

With 22,000 members in the American Economic Association, 400 of them amounts to 1.8% of American economist. So while 1.8% opposed the cuts, Democrats tried to convince you that since four hundred professionals supposedly in the know oppose it, it must be bad.

What liberals did not tell you is that 98.2% of those ‘in the know’, support tax cuts.

Flash forward to today when Larry Summers, the President’s chief economic political strategist is telling us that “most economists” agree with the Administration’s punishing tax increases.

The President’s lack of willingness to provide true leadership on the issue is plunging us into an economic ‘Dark Age’.

While he is proposing more and more historic levels of government spending, his tax increases on those he calls “the rich”, will absorb the flow of money and the growth of any sustainable American economy.

Look at nothing but the facts. Despite trillions of dollars in new spending designed to create jobs and grow the economy, few if any private sector jobs have been created. These are sustainable jobs, work that finances itself through the free market and private sector. Work that does not require government funded taxpayer dollars to keep them viable. The only jobs that may have currently been created by all the new government spending are government jobs that provide the type of employment which requires taxpayers to pay for. They are not sustainable jobs.

Add to that a well over trillion dollar deficit, the lack of a growing economy or sustainable job growth, the lethal combination of shortfalls in long term federal entitlement programs, a near tripling of the national debt, and tax increases on those who pump money into the economy and what you have is a bus that is headed toward the end of the cliff that we are precariously traveling on.

Between increased government spending on unsustainable government jobs and government programs, and tax increases on sources that create sustainable jobs and economic growth, and what we are seeing is the epitome of liberal hypocrisy.

During tough economic times, the left insists that the government must spend our way out of it and into prosperity. Yet when the economy is running strong, liberals insist that it is our government’s moral obligation to still spend more money. This have your cake and eat too economic policy that legitimizes government spending under all circumstances, does not suffice. Not anymore.

But to this, the Obama regime and his comrades on the left fire back with the charge that Republicans are not offering any alternatives. According to Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and even the President, they claim that the G.O.P. is “just the party of ‘no’.”

What they don’t tell you is this.

Last year House Republicans proposed a budget that did provide an alternative to the Obama political economic strategy. It did the following.

It Kept federal spending at just above 20 percent of the gross domestic product, called for a temporary moratorium on earmarks and a cleaning up of the process that promotes earmarks, borrowed $3.6 trillion less than the President Obama’s budget, simplified the existing arcane tax code and had ‘NO’ tax increases, attempted to reform the unsustainable costs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and created $23,000 less debt per household than President Obama did.

These were alternatives that Republicans in the House put forward. But they were not the only ones House Republicans proposed. They also sponsored efforts to takes back the stimulus money that will be spent in 2010 and the years to follow once the recession is expected to be over. And one other notable proposal was a freeze on non-defense, non-veterans spending at the existing level for five years.

Sound familiar? It should.

One year later, in his State of the Union address, Supreme Czar Obama proposed a similar spending freeze for this year. It is an idea that, had President Obama been willing to work in the bipartisan manner that he is now calling for, he could have considered and enacted with Republican support.

A real “economic advisor” would have told the President to take that offer and run with it. He would have told him that it is a way to get Republican votes for the budget, show a sign of bipartisanship and perhaps begin to allow the government to get a handle on its out of control spending. But Larry Summers is not an economic advisor, he is a political strategist who is not working for the Commander-In-Chief, he is working for the Candidate-In-Chief.

Bookmark and Share
Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under politics

Ask Not What Your Country Can Spend For You. Ask What You Can Spend For Your Country

PhotobucketI am no economist but in reviewing the assessments and suggestions of major economists there seems to be some very valid suggestions, at least from what a layman like me can understand.

Despite my lack of economic expertise, I do know the basic fundamentals of the economy and I believe my understanding of those fundamentals is what can sometimes create some confusion when reviewing the advice of so called financial experts and leading economic government officials.

All the suggestions offered by them are based on spending.

Spending is what grows our economy. The more we consume and spend, the more that is produced. The more that is produced increases the need to employ more people to meet those production needs. By employing more people we are empowering others to spend more and from there the cycle continues in an ever growing circumference of increased wealth.

Sounds pretty simple. Yet other factors help to complicate things and break the seemingly simple and free flow of this cycle. Things such as unexpected shortages of materials, import and export troubles, natural disasters which influence the chain of events, and many more all factor in the process.

While understanding this, what is responsible for the current economic crisis?

Has there been some sort of natural disaster that has depleted a particular basic and essential resource that our economic cycle relies on? Has there been a total collapse of certain industries which have thrown the cycle off with an inordinate amount of unemployment and consumption which further deteriorate the supply and demand cycle?

To a certain, small extent, events like that have taken place but not in some kind of all consuming way. There have been droughts effecting crops and downturns in some markets that have produced layoffs. But none have been to the extent which has, for example, made wheat crops extinct or stopped cars from being made.

So what’s the problem?

Well in my unprofessional, economic, opinion, the problem is rooted in something that government financial experts are not discussing. In fact, in my opinion, most solutions being initiated by government officials, past, present and future, are the problem. They are trying to put icing on a cake before they baked it. They all promote spending.

In tune with the laws of supply and demand, spending is good. However; the focus on spending has been accentuated and promoted so much and for so long that it has brought about a couple of misguided generations that have taken that advice too far.

As a society we have become accustomed to spending more than we have, and responsibly. should.

The predatory promotional practices that financial markets undertake ,in an attempt to make more money of their own, is a big part of the current economic crisis. It is a crisis brought about by the chickens coming home to roost and the bill coming forward to be paid.

We have taken the advice of Republican and Democrat leaders and we have spent. The government has even taken their own advice and spends. The government has spent money in order to give us money to spend with. They call it an economic stimulus. The problem though is that

  1. The government doesn’t really have enough money to do that. They have their own, our own, deficit, and…….
  2. The money they gave us back in this so called stimulus package was ours, so maybe they should have taken less from us in the first place.

Those two points alone raise doubts about the soundness of the “spending solution” given to all of our problems. Yet, those in charge still offer it as the most sound solution to our problems. They even go a step further and ask people to not save any of the monies given out in stimulus packages.

Although I do not have a problem with spending,………. all you have to do is tag along with me at clothing or shoe store to realize that,….. I do have problem with spending money that we don’t have. And there in lies the problem.

The promoting of spending practices has created generations of spenders. These spenders don’t even use real money. They use plastic. We all use plastic. In some instances you can’t even pay for a good or service without credit.

This has led to our getting accustomed with living on borrowed money,……. plastic,……..fake money.

For decades now, the government has encouraged this practice. Government policies have encouraged borrowers and lenders to enter into deals that neither can really afford. The greatest example of this was the Homeownership Initiative that was created under the Clinton administration. It forced lenders to make a significant number of loans available to unqualified borrowers, borrowers who could not pay these loans back. The practice was so popular that it helped to create the banking crisis that ushered in the current crisis.

The promoted “spending” solutions that have dominated our problem solving efforts with the economy are, in and of themself, part of the problem.

Americans need to get back to an economy that is based on sound fiscal policies. That statement brings into play many suggested economic theories and actions but when I write “sound fiscal policies” I am not making reference to some deep epistemology of mankind or the ontology of finances. Nor am I debating the importance of the Keynesian school of thought. I am simply saying that society…..our citizens, needs to begin living within its means.

If one is not sure if they have enough money to put food on their plate, they should not be buying cell phones and using it to send out text messages asking if they can borrow money for dinner. I mean I am sure AT&T or T-Mobile appreciate the fee that your purchase and contracts will cost you but you will they be pleased with the bill collector that they have to employ to get their money.

My point is, we have gotten away from living within our means. We have become accustomed with living life on borrowed money. This practice has brought us to where we are today. And truth be told, there is no end in site.

I believe that we are about to enter a very tough transitional time that will last for many years. It is a time that will have us getting familiar with living within our means.

Doing so will mean less spending. Less spending will lead to less employment, and so on and so on. But this does not mean that the sky will fall and the economy will ultimately implode. It means that we will endure a difficult adjustment period but once we have become reacquainted with real money, sound personal financial habits and living within our means, the economy will eventually stabilize and growth will again be seen.

I am not alone in this thinking. Former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson has recently made a video addressing this same issue. In it, he takes a tongue-in-cheek approach to our current “spending solutions”.

Take a moment to view it. You’ll get a kick out of it. It left me wondering where the Fred Thompson, that we see in this video, was when he ran for the G.O.P.’s presidential nomination?

 

punchline-politics21

Post Election Toast

The Election Is Over, The Results Are Known.

The Will of the People Has Been Clearly Shown.

So Let All Get Together And Let Bitterness Pass

I’ll Hug Your Elephant, And You Kiss My Ass.

Leave a comment

Filed under politics