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.