Obama vs The Economy

Custom Search

  

  

Obama is single-handedly destroying the greatest economic engine in history
 

    



help fight the media
  
 

 

 

 

 
Items on this page are in chronological order or in order of discovery.  Previous years in left column . . .
DNC Chair Kaine Admits Obama Was Too Busy With His Socialist Agenda To Care About Jobs
    
         
Related:  Top House Republican Predicts "Significant" Bipartisan Support for Health Care Law Repeal

These Blade videos are shaky.  If you don't see the video box, click here . . .
One Second Of National Debt
Andrew Malcolm says if you're like most people not involved with drug trafficking, you don't often actually see U.S. money with more than one or two zeroes on it, as in $50 or $100.

Thus, Monday's news that the national debt was approaching the legal limit of $14.294 trillion creates a Clint Eastwood-style political showdown in the soggy streets of Washington.

On one side is Obama and his Democratic gang, who'd like the limit raised so their government can keep operating.  On the other end of Main Street is the newly enlarged posse of Republicans, who are feeling their enhanced leverage and want spending-cut commitments before going along with the usually pro forma limit-raising.

The national debt flew past $14 trillion last Friday.  That's a galactic sum that's difficult for any average American to imagine or even grasp. But let's try:

Fourteen trillion is 14-thousand billions.  A billion is a thousand millions.  A million is a thousand thousands.

A trillion has so many zeroes it won't fit in your checkbook -- 12 zeros, to be exact.

Last June 1 doesn't really seem all that long ago.  The Gulf oil disaster was barely half-spilled. Obama and Pancho Biden were still promising amazing job growth by summer's end.  The Senate was confirming Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court.  CIA Director Leon Panetta still wasn't sure where Osama bin Laden was.  Al and Tipper, and Tiger and Elin, were still married to each other.

Here's why we mention June 1.  On that day the national debt was "only" $13 trillion.  It's 214 days from June 1 through last Friday, Dec. 31.  That's 5,136 hours or 308,160 minutes or 18,489,600 seconds.

In those seven short months the national debt increased by $1,000,000,000,000.

That works out to be a growth in national debt of $54,084 borrowed during every single one of those 18,489,600 seconds.

The Obama administration has borrowed $4 trillion since taking power!  That's a trillion dollars every six months.  And Austan Goolsbee, Obama's economic adviser wants to borrow MORE!

US Debt Clock . . .
Unsustainable
John Hinderaker says a Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that by a 71-18 percent margin, Americans do not want the federal debt ceiling raised.  I am not sure whether that is a viable option, but the message the public is trying to send is clearly correct.  The country's debt has been rising at an accelerating rate for some time.  Whatever one may have thought of the debt prior to the time the Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007, it is beyond dispute that the debt we have been racking up since that time is unsustainable.  At The Corner, Veronica DeRugy offers this graph, which charts both federal debt and the statutory debt limit:
    

click image for larger chart
    
The problem, obviously, is the debt, not the debt limit.  But the public's focus on the debt ceiling presents both an opportunity and a hazard for Republicans -- an opportunity, if they can extract substantial spending cuts and other relief in exchange for what I assume is an inevitable increase in the limit; and a hazard if they can't, and if voters perceive an extension of the limit as evidence that Republicans aren't following through on their promises.
House GOP Gives Obama An Ultimatum On Debt Ceiling
Emily Miller says that House Republicans demand that Obama significantly cut government spending in exchange for Congress raising the national debt ceiling.  The GOP blames Obama and the former Democratic Congress for the out-of-control government spending that led to the rapid increase in debt.

The United States now has a record-setting $14 trillion in debt, and will hit the current statutory debt limit of $14.3 trillion as early as March.

The House GOP spent the weekend on a retreat in Baltimore discussing the upcoming fiscal battle with Obama.

"President Obama and Congressional Democrats have been on a job-destroying spending spree that has left us with nothing but historic unemployment and the most debt in U.S. history," Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) told the 218 House Republicans at the retreat.

Boehner said that Obama’s request for a higher debt limit will require changes in the way Democrats operate.  "If they want us to help pay their bills, they are going to have to start cutting up their credit card.  Cutting up the credit cards means cutting spending -- and implementing spending reforms to ensure we keep on cutting," he told his Members on Saturday.

(For years, Boehner has used the metaphor of a credit card when talking about the nation’s debt.  He often holds up the electronic voting card, which Members use to record their votes, and refers to it as "the most dangerous credit card in the history of the world.")

The Republicans have Obama over a barrel because if Congress does not pass a bill to increase the debt ceiling, the United States will default on its loans.  The debt ceiling is the legal amount the U.S. Government can borrow on credit.

Continue reading here . . .
Federal Debt Up $463.6 Billion In Last Three Months
CNSNews.com says the national debt jumped $463.6 billion in the first quarter of fiscal year 2011 (Oct. 1 to Dec. 31), the Treasury Department reports.

That means the government borrowed approximately an additional $1,500 for every one of the 308,745,538 men, women and children in the United States as counted by the 2010 Census.

If government debt continues to accumulate at that pace through the remaining three quarters of the fiscal year, total new debt for the year would amount to approximately $1.85 trillion -- or about $6,000 for every person in the country.

That would rival the $1.89 trillion in new debt the government piled up in fiscal 2009–the greatest debt-accumulation year in the history of the country -- when the federal government bailed out some of the nation’s largest banks and Barack Obama signed his economic stimulus package.

So far, fiscal 2010 (which ended on Sept. 30) ranks second after fiscal 2009, for the greatest federal debt accumulation -- with the government adding $1.65 trillion in new debt that year.

Continue reading here . . .
Path Is Sought For States To Escape Debt Burdens
Mary Walsh says Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.

Unlike cities, the states are barred from seeking protection in federal bankruptcy court.  Any effort to change that status would have to clear high constitutional hurdles because the states are considered sovereign.

But proponents say some states are so burdened that the only feasible way out may be bankruptcy, giving Illinois, for example, the opportunity to do what General Motors did with the federal government’s aid.

Beyond their short-term budget gaps, some states have deep structural problems, like insolvent pension funds, that are diverting money from essential public services like education and health care.  Some members of Congress fear that it is just a matter of time before a state seeks a bailout, say bankruptcy lawyers who have been consulted by Congressional aides.

Bankruptcy could permit a state to alter its contractual promises to retirees, which are often protected by state constitutions, and it could provide an alternative to a no-strings bailout.  Along with retirees, however, investors in a state’s bonds could suffer, possibly ending up at the back of the line as unsecured creditors.

Continue reading here . . .
Obama Is Not Done Spending
The Wall Street Journal is reporting Barack Obama will call for new government spending on infrastructure, education and research in his State of the Union address Tuesday, sharpening his response to Republicans in Congress who are demanding deep budget cuts, people familiar with the speech said.

Obama will argue that the U.S., even while trying to reduce its budget deficit, must make targeted investments to foster job growth and boost U.S. competitiveness in the world economy.  The new spending could include initiatives aimed at building the renewable-energy sector (enviros) -- which received billions of dollars in stimulus funding -- and rebuilding roads to improve transportation (unions), people familiar with the matter said.  Money to restructure the No Child Left Behind law's testing mandates and institute more competitive grants (NEA) also could be included.

While proposing new spending, Obama also will lay out significant budget cuts elsewhere, people familiar with the plans say, though they will likely fall short of what Republican lawmakers have requested.

Continue reading here . . .
Voodoo Economics
Gerry Broome totes up the jobs from Obama's stimulus.

By January 2011, the stimulus bill was supposed to have lowered the unemployment rate to 7 percent.  The current unemployment rate actually stands at 9.4 percent.  Democrats have lambasted Republicans for years for believing in "Voodoo economics."

Well, the evidence is mounting that economic superstition is alive and well in the nation's political circles, though it has nothing to do with a fondness for tax cuts.  It's instead the crazy belief that the government can spend its way to prosperity for the rest of us.  Underscoring this conclusion, the Ways and Means Committee in the new GOP-majority House released a report titled, "It's Official: On Unemployment and Jobs, Democrats' 2009 Stimulus Was a Huge Failure."

The Ways and Means report provides a number of striking reminders about the predictions the White House made in January 2009 while urging the passage of their $814 billion Keynesian spending bill.  By January 2011, the stimulus bill was supposed to have lowered the unemployment rate to 7 percent.  It now stands at 9.4 percent, and the report notes that "the unemployment rate would be 11.3 percent if it included all the 'invisible unemployed' -- American workers who have simply given up looking for work."  The report also claimed that the stimulus would create 3.7 million jobs by now, for a total of 137.6 million jobs in the American economy.  Currently, there are 130.7 million jobs.  Since passage of the stimulus, 47 of the 50 states have lost jobs; overall, the private sector has seen 1.8 million jobs disappear.

Note as well that unemployment is slightly above what the White House predicted it would be if the Obama stimulus program was not passed as emergency legislation.  Any honest assessment of the stimulus has to consider the possibility that flawed economics, kickbacks to unions and other Democratic special interests, corruption and an inefficient bureaucracy simply swallowed all the jobs for which those billions were supposed to pay.  In fact, job creation exceeded the White House's expectations in only one area: The District of Columbia created almost twice as many jobs as the White House anticipated.  In other words, thanks to the stimulus, the only sector creating new jobs is the federal government.

In response to the failure of Obamanomics, the Ways and Means Committee report offers four solutions to get the economy going again: Streamline the tax code; pass pending free-trade agreements so American companies can easily sell goods overseas; repeal and replace ObamaCare with reforms that actually lower insurance costs; and get spending under control so the national debt doesn't threaten the economy.  Democrats may call this voodoo economics, but to most Americans it probably sounds like a popular and common-sense plan to get the economy going again.  After two years of Obamanomics, almost anything would be a welcome change.
How NOT To Create Jobs
Word is that Obama will focus on jobs in his State of the Union speech on Tuesday.  No surprise there: jobs are the American people's top public policy concern.  Obama reportedly will propose new and expanded federal spending programs as the means of job creation.  No surprise there either: what else do liberals have to offer?

Yet, says John Hinderaker, if there is one thing we know with an empirical certainty, it is that increasing federal spending will not, on balance, create more jobs.  Of course, whenever the government spends money someone is employed, or, at least, gets to cash a check.  This is what Obama had in mind when he said -- in a moment of supreme cluelessness -- "spending equals stimulus."  What Obama apparently does not understand is that government spending consumes resources, often inefficiently, that could better be used elsewhere.  Whenever the government wastes resources, the country grows poorer and job growth is suppressed.  This, in crude terms, is why the ballooning public expenditures of recent years have not caused a boom in the job market.

To illustrate this point, I created this simple chart.  It plots federal spending from 1998 through FY 2011, on a scale of $1 trillion to $4 trillion, against the total number of non-farm jobs in January of each year, in thousands, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    
    
It is blindingly obvious that spending does not equal stimulus, and increasing federal spending will not create jobs.  There are two possibilities here.  One is that Obama is one of the last people in America who have not figured this out.  The other is that Obama knows his proposals are dumb, from an economic standpoint, but doesn't care.  The one thing that more government spending will accomplish is to slide more money to Barack Obama's cronies and to various constituencies of the Democratic Party.  Maybe that is all Obama ever wanted.

The union treasuries are flush with the tax-monies that Obama poured in as Stimulus money.  It all will come flowing back out during Election 2012.
Obama The Destroyer
Jim Hoft asks, "Can we all agree that this administration really doesn’t care about jobs?"

Obama announced that he would limit new oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Barack Obama knew his offshore drilling moratorium would cost at least 23,000 jobs but went ahead with it anyway. After all, what’s another 23,000 jobs when you’ve lost several million already?

It was even reported that Team Obama fudged a report to support their drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico.

But this didn’t stop the Obama Administration.  These radical leftists still have not lifted their deepwater-drilling moratorium.  This week a federal judge ruled the Obama Administration was in contempt for continuing the job-killing stunt.

As oil prices continue to climb, a backlog of more than 100 offshore drilling plans for the Gulf of Mexico are awaiting approval from the Obama administration, according to federal data.

The federal government has not approved a single new exploratory drilling plan in the Gulf of Mexico since lifting its deepwater drilling moratorium on Oct. 12.  There are currently 103 plans awaiting review by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement in an area that accounts for more than 25 percent of domestic oil production.

Obama's Environmental Protection Agency pulled the plug on a massive mountaintop-removal coal mine in West Virginia that the Bush administration had signed off on in 2007. The move was the agency’s first-ever retroactive veto of a coal mine permit

And on, and on, and on.
Obama Regime's Cynical Exploitation and Callous Indifference
Steve McCann says it has become more difficult as each day dawns to listen to the ramblings coming out of Washington D.C.  It is either a case of abject ignorance or a deliberate attempt to find out how naive and ignorant the American people are.  In the case of Obama it is a combination of both in the case of the Federal Reserve it is the latter.

Today Obama announced that U.S. business leaders had an obligation, yes an obligation, to the country to hire more workers, pay better wages and keep jobs in the country.  He is now calling on American companies to see themselves as partners with the government saying: "That government and businesses have a mutual responsibilities; and that if we fulfill these obligations together, it benefits us all."

Yet, according to the actions of Obama and the Democrats, the obligations are solely those of American business.

There is no word coming out of the White House on any plan to: tackle the massive government deficit and debts; eliminate tens of thousands of pages of regulations; abandon new carbon controls; repeal of ObamaCare; significantly reduce the highest corporate taxes in the world.  Those issues simply move forward while the businesses Obama expects to fulfill his new edict compete with the rest of the world with an anchor (all the above) attached.

These words are meant for political consumption.  As jobs creation continues to stagnate due solely to the policies of the Obama administration, he will point to business saying he asked them to fulfill their obligations to the people and those greedy capitalists did not.  This is a blatant attempt to shift the blame.  American business's only obligation is to its shareholders and to a lesser degree its current employees to make a profit and remain afloat.  This administration is without any honor or integrity and is only concerned with itself not the American people.

In another part of Washington D.C., Ben Bernanke vehemently denies that the quantitative easing (essentially printing money) by the Federal Reserve has had an impact on world-wide food prices.  He stated instead that these impoverished third world countries can control these costs by controlling excess demand within the country.

"Excess demand" -- how does that apply to feeding a population when up to 50% or more of the income goes into just buying basic food items for themselves and their families?

Bernanke offered as a solution: "They can for example, use monetary policy [interest rates] of their own.  They can adjust their exchange rates, which is something they've been reluctant to do in some cases"

Not since Marie Antoinette suggested to the starving peasants in France "let them eat cake" has so callous a statement been made.  This might be a fine strategy in the theoretical world of the classroom, but by raising interest rates or adjusting exchange rates, these countries would only succeed in making food items even more expensive, not to mention potentially triggering even more inflation.

The fact of the matter is that by essentially printing another trillion dollars, and flooding the world with greenbacks, the Fed has pushed capital inflows into commodities (which are priced in dollars) and into emerging markets.  There is little these emerging countries can do to hold back this tidal wave as food prices and shortages will soon engulf the planet creating more uncertainty and ultimately riots.

This is the leadership the United States now has under Obama: callous indifference and cynical exploitation.
8 Shocking, Funny And Revealing Things Obama Told The Chamber
From FoxNews.com
    

"I'm here in the interest of being more neighborly.  Maybe we would have gotten off on a better foot if I had brought over a fruitcake when we first moved in."

"I understand the significance of your obligations to your shareholders.  I get it.  But as we work with you to make America a better place to do business, ask yourselves what you can do for America."

"I want to put more people to work rebuilding crumbling roads and bridges."

"To make room for these investments in education, innovation, and infrastructure, government also has a responsibility to cut the spending that we just can't afford.  That's why I've promised to veto any bill larded up with earmarks."

"We're trying to run the government more like you run your businesses -- with better technology and faster services.  In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the federal government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America."

"The perils of too much regulation are matched by the dangers of too little."

"If we're fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports to help you compete, the benefits can't just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top.  They should be shared by American workers."

"We can create a virtuous cycle."

      

Commie In Chief Flunks Business 101
  
    
In his address to the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, Obama demonstrates that he never took "Introduction to Business 101" while he was attending all those Ivy League schools by saying that corporate profits should "be shared by American workers."

No, they don't.  Corporate profits are distributed to the share-holders, the people who have risked their money by investing in the corporation.  American workers benefit via their wages and benefits.  Risk-taking investors benefit by "sharing profits."

Corporate officers are not paid from "profits," and their primary responsibility is to make money for their stockholders, not "share the wealth."
Obama Debt Now Equals The Entire Economy
Stephen Dinan says Obama‘s budget, released Monday, was conceived as a blueprint for future spending, but it also paints the bleakest picture yet of the current fiscal year, which is on track for a record federal deficit and will see the government’s overall debt surpass the size of the total U.S. economy.

Obama‘s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year.  That would be 102.6 percent of GDP -- the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.

And the budget projects the government will run a deficit of $1.645 trillion this year, topping 2009’s previous record by more than $230 billion.  By contrast, 2007’s deficit was just $160 billion altogether.

Still, amid the other staggering numbers in the budget Obama sent to Congress on Monday, the debt stands out because Congress will need to vote to raise the debt limit later this year, and because the numbers are so large.

In one often-cited study, economists Carmen Reinhart and Ken Rogoff have argued that when a nation’s gross debt passes 90 percent it hinders overall economic growth.  The government measures debt several ways.  Debt held by the public includes the money borrowed from Social Security’s trust fund.

Actual debt held by the public will reach 72 percent of GDP in 2011 and will climb as the Social Security trust fund’s finances continue to deteriorate.

Continue reading here . . .

Related:  Obama budget: $3.7 trillion

Related:  Obama’s Budget: Taxes, Taxes, and More Taxes…
We've Piled Up A Whole Bunch Of Debt
Jim Hoft says Obama just increased the US National Debt by $4 trillion or 28% in 2 years.

After adding $4 trillion to the national debt in only two years Obama told reporters today that, "We’ve racked up a whole bunch of debt" -- Via The Leader Board -- at a press conference yesterday, Obama said:
   

"We’ve Piled Up -- We’ve Racked Up A Whole Bunch Of Debt."

        

10.6 Trillion Dollars -- Debt Level On Day One Of Obama Administration

14.1 Trillion Dollars -- Debt Level Today

26.3 Trillion Dollars -- Debt Level Set By New White House Budget

             
What's all this WE stuff, Obama?  YOU did that.
The Damage Obama Has Done

Dick Morris And Eileen McGann say the ObamaMedia does not cover the full extent of the damage the Obama Administration has inflicted on this country.  Even FoxNews often doesn’t have the time to go into sufficient depth to explain what is happening:

      

January 2009 Today % chg Source
Avg. retail price/gallon gas in U.S. $1.83 $3.104 69.6% 1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) $43.48 $99.02 127.7% 2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) $38.74 $91.38 135.9% 2
Gold: London (per troy oz.) $853.25 $1,369.50 60.5% 2
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL $3.56 $6.33 78.1% 2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL $9.66 $13.75 42.3% 2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. fob $13.37 $35.39 164.7% 2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall 7.6% 9.4% 23.7% 3
Unemployment rate, blacks 12.6% 15.8% 25.4% 3
Number of unemployed 11,616,000 14,485,000 24.7% 3
Number of fed. employees, ex. military (curr = 12/10 prelim) 2,779,000 2,840,000 2.2% 3
Real median household income (2008 v 2009) $50,112 $49,777 -0.7% 4
Number of food stamp recipients (curr = 10/10) 31,983,716 43,200,878 35.1% 5
Number of unemployment benefit recipients (curr = 12/10) 7,526,598 9,193,838 22.2% 6
Number of long-term unemployed 2,600,000 6,400,000 146.2% 3
Poverty rate, individuals (2008 v 2009) 13.2% 14.3% 8.3% 4
People in poverty in U.S. (2008 v 2009) 39,800,000 43,600,000 9.5% 4
U.S. rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings 5 9 n/a 10
Present Situation Index (curr = 12/10) 29.9 23.5 -21.4% 11
Failed banks (curr = 2010 + 2011 to date) 140 164 17.1% 12
U.S. dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate 89.76 82.03 -8.6% 2
U.S. money supply, M1, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 1,575.1 1,865.7 18.4% 13
U.S. money supply, M2, in billions (curr = 12/10 prelim) 8,310.9 8,852.3 6.5% 13
National debt, in trillions $10.627 $14.052 32.2% 14

     

Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation’s history.  Over 27 times as fast!  Metaphorically, speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane 27 times faster . . . it would be doing 1,755 MPH!

      

(1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor’s/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury

A Complete And Total Joke
The Economic Collapse blog is asking if Barack Obama is trying to play a joke on all of us?  The budget that the Obama administration has submitted for fiscal 2012 is so out of touch with reality that it may as well be a budget for "Narnia", "Fantasy Island", "Atlantis" or some other mythical land.

You can view the hard numbers for Barack Obama's 2012 budget right here.  Obama's budget assumes that the U.S. will experience economic growth of over 5 percent for most of the coming decade.  That is so far-fetched that "optimistic" is not the right word for it.  It also assumes that U.S. government income (primarily made up of taxes on all of us) will more than double over the next ten years.  For 2011, the budget projects that the U.S. government will take in a total of 2.1 trillion dollars, and for 2021 the budget projects that the U.S. government will take in a total of 4.9 trillion dollars.

For the Obama administration to assume that the federal government will be able to drain an extra 2.8 trillion dollars per year out of the American people by the year 2021 is ridicul0us beyond belief.  In his new budget Barack Obama does propose some very, very modest spending cuts that he knows have no chance of getting through Congress.  Barack Obama's budget for 2012 also does not even attempt to make any cuts to entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.  In essence, you can sum up Barack Obama's budget proposal for 2012 by saying that it is a complete and total joke.  This budget is so delusional and so out of touch with reality that it is hard to imagine anyone taking it seriously.

Oh, but Obama is really trying to sell it hard.  When Obama unveiled this new $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 at a middle school in Baltimore, he insisted that his plan will make it "so that every American is equipped to compete with any worker anywhere in the world."

Well, that is a nice sound bite, but as I have written about previously, unless Barack Obama suddenly finds a way to stop multinational corporations from paying slave labor wages to their workers on the other side of the globe the job losses in America are going to continue.

But that is a topic for another day.  Getting back to the 2012 budget, Obama is proposing to cut more than a trillion dollars from federal budget deficits over the next ten years.

That sounds really good until you figure out that means that the cuts only amount to about $100 billion a year.  Considering the fact that Obama's budget is projecting that we will have a $1.6 trillion budget deficit this year alone, that really is not a whole heck of a lot to be cutting.

The truth is that Barack Obama should be proposing spending cuts that are at least ten times as large if he was actually serious about addressing our budget woes.

But at least Obama is not proposing an increase in spending.

Oh wait, he actually is.

Continue reading here . . .
U.S. Unemployment Up To 10.0%
Gallup says U.S. Unemployment is up to 10.0% in Mid-February, as underemployment surged to 19.6%, from 18.9% at the end of January .
    
    
The percentage of part-time workers who want full-time work worsened considerably in mid-February, increasing to 9.6% of the workforce from 9.1% in January.
    
Obama Has Borrowed $30K Per Household
Terence P. Jeffrey says the federal government has borrowed an additional $29,660 per household in the United States since Barack Obama signed his economic stimulus law two years ago.

That brings the total national debt to a frightening $125,475.18 per household.

At the close of business on Feb. 17, 2009, the day Obama signed the $787-billion law, the national debt stood at $10.79 trillion ($10,789,783,760,341.41), according the Bureau of the Public Debt.  At the close of business on Feb. 16, 2011, the national debt stood at $14.13 trillion ($14,129,889,690,377.50) -- an increase of $3.34 trillion (3,340,105,930,036.09)

The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that there are a total of 112,611,029 households in the United States, which average about 2.6 people per household.  That means that the new debt accumulated in the two years since Feb. 17, 2009, when Obama signed his economic stimulus law, equals about $29,660.55 per household.

The current total national debt of $14.13 trillion can be divided into equal portions of $125,475.18 for each of the 112,611,029 households in the country.
Inflation Making a Comeback
  

  
Economics 101:  Socialism always creates inflation.
Economics 201:  Communism does it with an iron fist.
    
Weasel Meister points to an item in The Washington Times that reports inflation is making a quick comeback after touching the lowest levels in decades last fall.

Fast-rising prices for food, fuel and other basic necessities, stoked by rapid growth in emerging countries, are coming home to American consumers despite reluctance by U.S. businesses to raise their prices.

A report from the Labor Department on Thursday showed consumer prices rose by 0.4 percent in each of the past two months -- or a 4 percent annual rate over the last quarter fed by the biggest gains in food prices in two years and surging energy prices.

The report also showed a broadening of price pressures as airlines jacked up their fares by an average of 2.2 percent to pass on the cost of higher fuel and retailers raised clothing prices by 1 percent to reflect the higher costs of cotton and other fabrics.

Continue reading here . . .
Jobs Created And Saved By Stimulus Cost $228,055 Each
Matt Cover says the jobs created and saved by the economic stimulus law that Barack Obama signed on Feb. 17, 2009 cost at a minimum an average of $228,055 each, according to data released yesterday by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

In a report released Wednesday -- "Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output from October Through December 2010" -- the CBO said it now estimates the stimulus law cost a total of $821 billion, up from CBO’s original estimate that the stimulus would cost $787 billion.

In the same report, the CBO estimated that in the fourth quarter of 2010 there were somewhere between 1.3 million and 3.5 million people who were then employed who would not have been had the stimulus not been enacted.  "CBO estimates," says the report, "that ARRA’s policies had the following effects in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2010: … Increased the number of people employed by between 1.3 million and 3.5 million."

This estimate seeks to state the net impact the stimulus had on the number of people employed in the United States as a result of the stimulus, taking into account not only the new jobs believed to be created and the existing jobs believed to be killed by the stimulus, but also the existing jobs that were saved that otherwise would have been lost.

The CBO’s estimate that there were 1.3 million to 3.5 million people employed in the fourth quarter of 2010 who would not have been were it not for the stimulus represents a decline from the 1.4 million to 3.6 million people CBO estimated were employed as a result the stimulus during the third quarter of 2010.  (See Table 1 in the report.)  In fact, CBO now estimates that the apogee of the stimulus’s net job-creating-and-saving power occurred in the third quarter of 2010 when it believes somewhere between 1.4 million and 3.6 million people had jobs they would not have had except for the stimulus.

Thus, the $821 billion cost of the stimulus divided by the maximum of 3.6 million jobs the CBO believes the stimulus may have saved or created equals an average of $228,055 per job.

At the lower end of the CBO’s top job-creating-and-saving estimate for the stimulus -- 1.4 million jobs -- the jobs would cost an average of $586,428 a piece.

In February 2009, when Obama signed the stimulus law the national unemployment rate was 8.2 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  In January 2011, the national unemployment rate was 9.0 percent.
Insane Or Evil -- Or Both -- Your Call
Julian Pecquet says Obama reiterated his call for Congress to invest in the nation's long-term future in his weekly address Saturday, at times repeating almost to the word what he said during his State of the Union address last month.

"Invest" -- that's ObamaSpeak for SPEND, SPEND, SPEND.

As lawmakers prepare to take up a stop-gap budget bill to keep the government funded past the end of next week, Obama again linked the twin goals of out-educating and out-innovating the rest of the world while getting the nation back on sound fiscal footing.

"Investments in education, innovation, and infrastructure are an essential down payment on our future," he said.  "But ... the only way we can afford these investments is by getting our fiscal house in order.  Just like any family, we have to live within our means to make room for things we absolutely need."

"Live within our means..." -- That statement right there makes me lean towards "insane."  Obama has been demonstrably profligate in both his personal and public life forever.  If it isn't his, he'll spend it

Investments in education" -- This serves two ends.  The first is more money for the American Federation of Teachers and associated unions so they can spend it during Obama's 2012 campaign in support of Obama.  The second is to indoctrinate America's school children -- and you had better believe that's what they are up to.  Obama wants American children to grow up hating America, for its "racism," and capitalism.  Obama and his buddies have been working on this for more than 20 years

"Innovation" -- Gazillions more for windmills.  More still for solar panels.  More and more for biomass, geothermal, and biofuels.  Any hair-brained scheme -- as long as it isn't oil, coal, gas, or nuclear based.  Obama is out to put those energy sources out of business.

"Infrastructure" -- Bazillions for union jobs, and big-city Democratic boondoggles.


Fiscal conservatives criticized Obama's budget proposal last week for running up the national deficit to a record $1.6 trillion this year while punting on solutions to the problem of growing entitlement spending.

In his weekly address, Obama defended his proposal to freeze domestic spending over the next five years, which he said would cut non-security discretionary spending down to a share of the economy "lower than it was under Ronald Reagan."

But, this statement makes me lean towards out-and-out evil.  Look what this maniac WANTS to cut!

Obama called on Congress to propose cuts to "defense spending, spending in Medicare and Medicaid, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes."

Defense (the military) and healthcare (old people) are SOL in ObamaWorld.
Obama Still Blames Dubya
Jim Hoft says there’s a reason why the state-run media won’t show you this chart.

Barack Obama tripled the national deficit in his first year in office.  His second year in office the deficit was at $1.29 Trillion dollars.  This year he will top it again.  This chart was updated to reflect the recent news that the deficit will reach $1.6 trillion this year.
    
    
At the National Governors Association Meeting at the White House, Obama said:
    

Making these necessary investments would be hard at any time. But it’s that much harder at a time when resources are scarce. After living through a decade of deficits and a historic recession that made them worse, we can’t afford to kick the can down the road any longer. So the budget debate that we’re having is going to be critical here in Washington. And so far, most of it’s been focused almost entirely on how much of annual domestic spending -- what in the parlance we all domestic discretionary spending -- that we should cut. There’s no doubt that cuts in discretionary spending have to be a part of the answer for deficit reduction.

    
Hoft predicts Obama will blame Bush after he raises the deficit by another $300 billion this year too, and says, "This is not an honest man."
Obama Seeks Billions More For War Against Cars
The Washington Examiner asks us to remember Obama's $787 billion stimulus program.  Obama defended that unprecedented spending spree, which included legions of allegedly "shovel-ready" transportation projects, by promising the explosion of government outlays would jump-start the economy.

But after "investing" billions of borrowed dollars in transportation just two years ago, why is Obama now asking for an 84 percent increase in the Department of Transportation (DoT) budget over 2010 levels?  As Ronald Utt of the Heritage Foundation pointed out earlier this week, Obama included a $48.1 billion spending increase for DoT in his 2012 budget proposal.  If Obama gets his way, Utt calculates, transportation outlays will increase more than 10 times faster than all other federal spending.  The man Obama appointed in 2009 to manage the Transportation Department is former Illinois Republican Rep. Ray LaHood, who a few months ago promised to put cars and bicycles on "an equal footing" in federal funding decisions.

In an October 2010 interview, LaHood denigrated the "traditional people in Congress who like the idea that we continue to build roads and bridges and things like that," as opposed to the "big things" he and Obama support, including enormously expensive high-speed rail, unprofitable low-speed Amtrak, and other forms of government-subsidized mass transit.  LaHood has become an outspoken proponent of what rabid environmentalists misleadingly call "livability."  That's a rhetorical device used by Democratic officials and political activists, as well as liberals in the mainstream media, to justify using government funding to force people now living in the suburbs to move back into densely packed central cities where they would have to depend upon mass transit rather than privately owned vehicles.  While that might not seem like such a big difference, it is, because cars enable people to go where they choose when they choose.  With mass transit, government decides for you where and when you go.

A prime example of the livability fantasy is the Dulles Rail project now under construction in Northern Virginia.  The federal government is spending $900 million for Phase 1 of a Metrorail extension that even the Federal Transit Administration admits will attract only 10,000 new daily transit riders and will have virtually no effect on the area's notorious traffic congestion.  As Utt points out, federal transportation programs always become political slush funds used by professional politicians to reward unionized labor, which jacks up the costs of rail and other construction projects by almost 10 percent.

Policies that reduce Americans' mobility also dramatically shrink their access to new job opportunities, which is crucial to wealth production in a dynamic economy.  Mobility equals freedom, but under the Obama administration's latest transportation proposal, taxpayers will pay more for less of both.
Obama Says We Need To Live Within Our Means
Flopping Aces is amazed at the gall of this guy.

After he signed the short-term bill yesterday, Obama said in a statement:
    

"I’m calling on Democratic and Republican leaders of Congress to begin meeting immediately with the Vice President, my Chief of Staff, and Budget Director so we can find common ground on a budget that makes sure we are living within our means."

    
Saying that this country must live within its means is an audacious statement coming from Obama who championed an $814 billion failed stimulus bill, all of which was paid for with deficit spending.  It’s audacious coming from his administration that is leading the country into another consecutive year with a deficit over a trillion dollars.  And it’s audacious coming from a White House that proposed a budget for the following fiscal year that grows the debt to $20 trillion in five years and never once in a decade spends less than it’s taking in.
    
    
And he’s not done.  He wants a 62% increase in spending for Transportation -- 62%!

Let’s see, that’s about $93 billion per year in new spending over that time.  Yet when Republicans proposed cutting a bit more than that across the whole federal government it’s draconian.  But spending another half billion dollars we don’t have?  Why that’s how things are done, it’s for the unions after all.

Oh, that’s right….its not spending it’s "investing"

You'll notice, Obama never said that HE had to.
Unemployment Hits 10.3% In February
Dennis Jacobe, Gallup's Chief Economist says unemployment, measured without seasonal adjustment, hit 10.3% in February -- up from 9.8% at the end of January. The U.S. unemployment rate is now essentially the same as the 10.4% at the end of February 2010.
     
    
Underemployment, a measure that combines part-time workers wanting full-time work with those who are unemployed, surged in February to 19.9%. This resulted from the combination of a sharp 0.5-point increase since the end of January in the percentage unemployed and a 0.5-point increase in the percentage working part time but wanting full-time work. Underemployment is now higher than it was at this point a year ago (19.7%).
     
    
The percentage of part-time workers who want full-time work worsened considerably in February, increasing to 9.6% of the workforce from 9.1% at the end of January. A larger percentage of the U.S. workforce is working part time and wanting full-time work now than was the case a year ago (9.3%).
Obama's Record -- Bureaucrats Up, Private Sector Down
Zip says, since December 2007, the federal work force is up 11.7%.  The private sector has plummeted to 6.6%.
    
    
Since the beginning of the last recession (December 2007) the private sector workforce has shrunk by 6.6% while shedding more than 7.5 million jobs.  Over that same time period, the federal government workforce (excluding Census and Postal workers) has grown by 11.7% while adding 230,000 jobs.

This trend has continued throughout the Obama Administration.  Since Barack Obama was sworn into office, the private sector workforce has shrunk by 2.6%, shedding 2.9 million jobs, while the federal workforce (excluding Census and Postal workers) has grown by 7% while adding more than 144,000 jobs.

Continue reading here . . .

There's nothing the Left loves more than a fiscally unsustainable bloated government bureaucracy.
Obama Posts Largest Monthly Deficit Ever
Jim Hoft says Worst.  President.  Ever.

Barack Obama told Americans Saturday in his Weekly Address,
    

"We need a government that lives within its means."

    
But, that was Saturday -- today we found out that Obama’s February deficit topped Bush’s Deficit for all of 2007.

Barack Obama tripled the national deficit in his first year in office.  In his second year the deficit was again a record $1.29 Trillion.  This year the deficit will be even higher.
    
    
The Washington Times reported the federal government posted its largest monthly deficit in history in February at $223 billion, according to preliminary numbers the Congressional Budget Office released Monday morning.

That figure tops last February’s record of $220.9 billion, and marks the 29th straight month the government has run in the red -- a modern record.  The last time the federal government posted even a monthly surplus was September 2008, just before the financial collapse.

Last month’s federal deficit is nearly four times as large as the spending cuts House Republicans have passed in their spending bill, and is more than 30 times the size of Senate Democrats’ opening bid of $6 billion.

But don’t worry -- Democrats are willing to cut a .28% from their record budget.
Obama Wants You  To Pay More At The Pump
 
    
American Solutions is re-launching Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less for one big reason: Obama’s continuing war on American energy is dramatically increasing the price of gas and diesel.

To be fair, Obama is in favor of drilling…but just not in the United States.

His numerous bans, restrictions, and proposed taxes are hamstringing America’s ability to produce more oil and gas and are thereby increasing gas and diesel prices.  In fact, even the federal government projects that domestic oil production will drop by 220,000 barrels per day in 2011 due to the President’s anti-drilling agenda. Production in 2012 will drop even more.

If we produce less oil, we will produce less gasoline, which means higher prices at the pump.

Continue reading here . . .

By increasing gas and diesel prices, Obama is ensuring the price of EVERYTHING will increase.  In America, EVERYTHING we buy is delivered by trains, planes and trucks.

Obama's energy policy results in a hidden tax on EVERYTHING we buy, and then he won't even admit his policies are creating run-away inflation.
Obama Sends American Jobs And Money To Brazil
This remark, from Obama's speech in Rio, is the latest sign of Obama's desire to bankrupt America:
    

"In particular, with the new oil finds off Brazil, President Rousseff has said that Brazil wants to be a major supplier of new stable sources of energy, and I've told her that the United States wants to be a major customer, which would be a win-win for both our countries."

    
John Hinderaker says that under Obama's new, post-industrial order, petroleum engineering and exploration, drilling and refining are more jobs Americans won't do.  Instead, others create wealth and we pay them for it.  With what?  That doesn't seem to be a question that occurs to Barack Obama.

Related:  Obama approves Brazilian floating oil storage in the U. S. Gulf of Mexico, but blocks American firms from drilling there.

Related:  There are more than 1,000 in Obama's Brazil retinue. 

Now we know why Obama gave $2 billion to finance oil exploration off Brazil.  Win-win?  He wants Brazil to be the supplier, and America the customer.  Sounds to me like that's a loss for us and a win for Marxist Brazil. 

More American dollars leaving the country, while Obama sits on our own oil. 
That's your money that the Marxist Obama is spending to hand over America's oil industry to Brazil's Marxist ex-guerilla, Dilma Rousseff..

Obama has more in common with her than with most Americans.
US Approaching Insolvency, Fix To Be "Painful"
CNBC.com is reporting that the United States is on a fiscal path towards insolvency and policymakers are at a "tipping point," a Federal Reserve official said on Tuesday.

"If we continue down on the path on which the fiscal authorities put us, we will become insolvent, the question is when," Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher said in a question and answer session after delivering a speech at the University of Frankfurt.  "The short-term negotiations are very important.  I look at this as a tipping point."

But he added he was confident in the Americans' ability to take the right decisions and said the country would avoid insolvency.

"I think we are at the beginning of the process and it's going to be very painful," he added.

Fisher earlier said the US economic recovery is gathering momentum, adding that he personally was extremely vigilant on inflation pressures.

"We are all mindful of this phenomenon.  Speaking personally, I am concerned and I am going to be extremely vigilant on that front," Fisher said in an interview with CNBC.

Fisher added that the U.S. Federal Reserve had ways to tighten its monetary policy other than interest rates, including by selling Treasurys, changing reserves levels and using time deposits.

He added that he does not support the Fed embarking on an additional round of quantitative easing (
printing money).

"Barring some extraordinary circumstance I cannot forsee ... I would vote against a QE3," Fisher told CNBC.  "I don't think it's necessary.  Again, we have a self-sustaining recovery."
Obama's Economic Recovery
    
Theresa McCabe says participation in the U.S. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, reached an all-time high in January.

The number of SNAP recipients nationwide ticked up to 44.2 million in January, 2011, or about one in seven Americans, from 44.1 million in December, 2010, according to data released by the U.S. Agriculture Department's Food and Nutrition Service on Friday.

The number of recipients grew by 4.8 million from 39.4 million recorded in January last year, and 32 million in the same month in 2009.

The total cost related to the food stamp program dropped about $21.4 million to $5.87 billion from a month earlier, as the average monthly benefit for each recipient in January decreased slightly to $132.81 from $133.61 in December, 2010.

The overall cost of the program in January 2011 was up $614.6 million to $5.87 billion from $5.25 billion in the same month a year before.

The total number of U.S. households in SNAP in January 2011 climbed above 20.7 million from just below that level in the month prior and 18.1 million in the same period in 2010.

The U.S. Food and Nutrition Service said the total number of persons enrolled in SNAP in fiscal 2011 sits at 43.8 million, up from 40.3 million in 2010 and 33.5 million in 2009.

And they're all bussed to the polls by the community organizers from ACORN to vote Democrat.
Who's Turning U.S. Into The Third World?
Investors.com says that Obama says Republicans, if they get their way, will turn the U.S. into a "Third World" nation. Has he looked recently at the course he's set us on? As psychologists say, it sounds like projection to us.

One of the cheapest tricks in political rhetoric is to accuse your opponents of doing something bad that you yourself are doing. That's exactly what Obama did when he charged that GOP efforts to restore fiscal responsibility would turn us into "a nation of potholes, and our airports would be worse than places ... that we used to call the Third World."

Never mind that most of what he's talking about -- like "potholes" and airports -- have always been local priorities, and Obama is not a mayor.  But what stuck in our craw was that "Third World" crack.  Excuse us, isn't that the way we've been heading under Obama? Consider for a moment these trends:
    

•  Real earnings have fallen for five straight months, and are down 1% since the end of last year.

•  Consumer price inflation is growing at a 6.1% annual rate over the last three months, while producer prices are rising an even-faster 13%.  According to John Williams of the Shadow Government Statistics website, if we measure consumer prices the way we did before 1992, inflation is now running at 10% a year.

•  The U.S. has added $6 trillion to its debt under Obama, a sure sign of being on the road to Third World status.  Three years ago, the U.S. had $7.9 trillion in debt.  Today, we have $14 trillion. Bankrupt, hyperinflated Zimbabwe couldn't do any better.

•  The U.S. dollar has fallen so much and foreign nations have so little confidence in our ability to run our fiscal affairs that the "BRIC" nations -- the mostly fast-growing former Third World nations of Brazil, Russia, India and China -- are talking about replacing the U.S. dollar in foreign trade with the Chinese yuan.

•  Just 45.4% of Americans had jobs last year, the lowest since 1983, according to census data crunched by USA Today.  Among men, just 66.8% had work last year, the lowest ever.

•  Obama touts the "recovery" that supposedly began in June of 2009, but a look at the data show that last year's real private sector GDP was in fact still down 1.1% from its peak in 2007 -- so all of the "expansion" has been in government, not the private sector.

•  While we're at it, under Obama, spending has risen farther and faster than at any time in history.  At current rates, government at all levels will take up more than half of all economic activity by 2050.

    
Can't happen here, you say?  In 1920, Argentina was one of the five richest countries on Earth.  Then it followed policies similar to Obama's -- kowtowing to unions, government control of industry, price controls.  It crashed, burned and never really recovered.

We're headed down that road.  Today, government spending is at a record 25% of GDP, while government regulation costs the U.S. economy $1.7 trillion a year.  As Vice President Biden might say, "That's real Third World, man."
To Retire National Debt, We Must Retire Obama
David Limbaugh says everyone but the blind and reckless agrees that the United States faces a dire financial crisis.  But only one of the two major political parties is offering a plan that has a reasonable chance of averting this crisis and restoring the nation to financial health.

Obama's ever-changing proposals, allegedly designed to tackle the problem, simply could not work.  One of the following must be true: He doesn't agree that the crisis is grave, doesn't understand that his policies can't work, doesn't have the same vision about America as most of us, or doesn't intend for his policies to work.

Some people believe he's intentionally damaging America, because they believe he's too smart not to know that we face a crisis and that his policies can't work.

I don't pretend to comprehend the inner child of his past that apparently impels him to pursue this current path of destruction.  My educated guess is that his leftist ideology blinds him to the inefficacy of failed liberal prescriptions but also that this same ideology tells him that if things don't get appreciably better, then that's OK, too, because America's had more than its fair share of prosperity anyway.

Think about it.  Through every fiber of his being runs a sense of injustice at what he perceives to be a grossly inequitable distribution of income in America.  He largely blames these inequities on capitalism.  Please don't call me an extremist for saying that, either; I hear it in almost everything he says and see it in what he does.

I correspond with liberals like Obama every day, whose angst reflexively attaches to those who have succeeded under our system: villainous corporations, oil companies, fat-cat bankers, and wealthy individuals.  It's not just that capitalism is inherently flawed for fostering a climate that guarantees such disparities in prosperity but also that those who have exploited these flaws are evil.

As the leftists' sense of fairness and "economic justice" tells them that people's incomes in this country should be more equitably distributed, it likewise tells them that the wealth of the world's nations should be more equitably distributed.  Call it "balance," the administration's most recent euphemism of choice.

I only indulge in this brief inquiry into Obama's mindset because it enables us to see that he doesn't view the nation's financial problems with the same degree of urgency as most of us do.  To him, the stakes don't seem quite so high, because if we fail, the worst that could happen is that we get our comeuppance and/or become a European socialist state -- and what's so bad about that?

Continue reading here . . .
Obama Economy Is Making You Poor
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown say while Barack Obama spends his time running victory laps around the country over the killing of Osama Bin Laden, the American economy is careening toward a dangerous cliff.  Royal Weddings, Obama’s multiple birth certificates, and absurd arguments about the NFL lockout dominate the news while daily Americans get poorer.

Obamanomics is a disaster.  A greater disaster hasn’t been visited on the United States in our economic history because we are taking no substantial steps toward recovery.  The real news, which should be screaming from every television and newspaper isn’t pro Obama, therefore, it is ignored.

Here are the stories on which we should be focusing.  The US dollar has slumped to a record low against major currencies.  Since we have devastated our manufacturing base over the last two decades, this will result in Americans paying substantially more for goods on the store shelves in retailers from Walmart to Costco.  The outlook for the recovery has diminished to almost zero.  If you subtract the impact of inflation, many economists believe we are actually still in a recession.  When I talk to my friends and neighbors outside of Washington DC, we unanimously agree we are still in recession.

Here are some statistics which will help you understand the pain.  More Americans are on food stamps today than at any other time in history.  That’s right -- the most in history.  The number of persons on food stamps is 44.2 million according a recent report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.  Those not on food stamps feel a different pain when they buy groceries.  We see unbelievably high prices at the grocery store.  The cost of living in the U.S. rose at its fastest pace since December 2009 in the 12 months ended in March.  Wheat, meat, vegetables and other grains are all surging in price.

But if you don’t have a job, it is hard to shop for groceries.

Bloomberg reported this week, "Applications for jobless benefits jumped by 43,000 to 474,000 in the week ended April 30, the most since August, Labor Department figures showed today."  This is a serious darkening in the employment clouds just as the recovery was supposed to be broadening.

The unprecedented easy money policies from the Federal Reserve haven’t helped the real economy.  Sure, they did pump enough billions of dollars into Wall Street Banks and Government Agencies to make sure the leather loafer wearing crowds in New York City and Washington DC are still swimming in cash.  But for the majority of Americans, they have felt only the pain of higher food and energy prices from the misallocation of dollars.

This week, as we fueled a rental car near the San Diego airport, we paid fifteen dollars for three gallons of gasoline.  At these prices, Americans are spending as much as $100 a week just to fuel the car to commute to work.  Why hasn’t Obama cleared the decks to deal with this energy crisis?  It is a crisis when it costs as much to commute to work as you make in take home pay.  Many Americans are already at this tipping point.  Obama mutters on about windmills and electric cars.  We need off shore drilling and increased production to ease this pain.

While the nation shudders under unmanageable regulatory and monetary burdens, Obama is oblivious.  Obama is flying from city to city collecting cash for his re-election drive.  And don’t let us forget he is spending over a hundred thousand dollars to a teleprompter coach.  And we thought standing and delivering a prepared text in front of a teleprompter was a skill he had already mastered.  How about a coach on how to manage the American economy?  Obama’s priorities are obvious, and they aren’t on helping everyday Americans, but his buddies and himself.
Obama’s Economy Is Making You Poor
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown say while Barack Obama spends his time running victory laps around the country over the killing of Osama bin Laden, the American economy is careening toward a dangerous cliff.  Royal Weddings, Obama’s multiple birth certificates, and absurd arguments about the NFL lockout dominate the news while daily Americans get poorer.

Obamanomics is a disaster.  A greater disaster hasn’t been visited on the United States in our economic history because we are taking no substantial steps toward recovery.  The real news, which should be screaming from every television and newspaper isn’t pro-Obama; therefore, it is ignored.

Here are the stories on which we should be focusing.  The U.S. dollar has slumped to a record low against major currencies.  Since we have devastated our manufacturing base over the last two decades, this will result in Americans paying substantially more for goods on the store shelves in retailers from Wal-Mart to Costco.

The outlook for the recovery has diminished to almost zero.  If you subtract the impact of inflation, many economists believe we are actually still in a recession.  When I talk to my friends and neighbors outside of Washington, D.C., we unanimously agree we are still in recession.

Here are some statistics which will help you understand the pain.  More Americans are on food stamps today than at any other time in history.  That’s right -- the most in history.  The number of persons on food stamps is 44.2 million, according a recent report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Those not on food stamps feel a different pain when they buy groceries.  We see unbelievably high prices at the grocery store.  The cost of living in the U.S. rose at its fastest pace since December 2009 in the 12 months ended in March.  Wheat, meat, vegetables and other grains are all surging in price.

But if you don’t have a job, it is hard to shop for groceries.

Bloomberg reported last week, "Applications for jobless benefits jumped by 43,000 to 474,000 in the week ended April 30, the most since August, Labor Department figures showed today."  This is a serious darkening in the employment clouds just as the recovery was supposed to be broadening.

The unprecedented easy money policies from the Federal Reserve haven’t helped the real economy.  Sure, they did pump enough billions of dollars into Wall Street banks and government agencies to make sure the leather loafer wearing crowds in New York City and Washington, D.C., are still swimming in cash.  But for the majority of Americans, they have felt only the pain of higher food and energy prices from the misallocation of dollars.

This week, as we fueled a rental car near the San Diego airport, we paid $15 for three gallons of gasoline.  At these prices, Americans are spending as much as $100 a week just to fuel the car to commute to work.  Why hasn’t Obama cleared the decks to deal with this energy crisis?  It is a crisis when it costs as much to commute to work as you make in take home pay.  Many Americans are already at this tipping point.  Obama mutters on about windmills and electric cars.  We need off shore drilling and increased production to ease this pain.

While the nation shudders under unmanageable regulatory and monetary burdens, Obama is oblivious.  Obama is flying from city to city, collecting cash for his re-election drive.  And don’t let us forget he is spending over a hundred thousand dollars for a teleprompter coach.

And we thought standing and delivering a prepared text in front of a teleprompter was a skill he had already mastered.  How about a coach on how to manage the American economy?  Obama’s priorities are obvious, and they aren’t on helping everyday Americans, but his buddies and himself.
Obama Regime Brings Back Subprime Mortgages
Rush Limbaugh says: Now, I have a story here that's simply unreal, and it's from last week.  I purposely sat on this story to see if I would see it anywhere else.  I've had it in the stack since May the 5th, almost a week.  It's from Business Week magazine, a story by Clea Benson, headline: "A Renewed Crackdown on Redlining -- In the wake of the subprime implosion, the Obama Administration has stepped up its scrutiny of disadvantaged neighborhoods' credit access.
 
Community activists in St. Louis became concerned a couple of years ago that local banks weren't offering credit to the city's poor and African American residents.  So they formed a group called the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance and began writing complaint letters to federal regulators.

"Apparently, someone in Washington took notice.  The Federal Reserve has cited one of the group's targets, Midwest BankCentre, a small bank that has been operating in St. Louis's predominantly white, middle-class suburbs for over a century, for failing to issue home mortgages or open branches in disadvantaged areas.  Although executives at the bank say they don't discriminate, Midwest BankCentre's latest annual report says it is in the process of negotiating a settlement with the US Justice Dept. over its lending practices."

Can I translate this for you?  They're bringing back subprimes.  Bringing back the subprime mortgage.  It's simply unreal.  While we're all being distracted by other news, everybody but me, the regime and the Federal Reserve are again forcing banks to give mortgages to people who cannot afford them, which is exactly what got us into our current mess.  That's 90% of why we're where we are today.  And you note here that the government's now telling banks where they have to put their branches.  The Justice Department's telling this little bank company where they have to open branches, just like the National Labor Relations Board told Boeing, "You cannot open a plant in South Carolina."  And it's being ramrodded -- if I read the whole story to you, you'd hear this -- it's being ramrodded by the same guy, Thomas Perez at the Justice Department, who opposed prosecuting the New Black Panthers.

The guy at Holder's Department of Justice who refused to prosecute the Black Panthers is pushing this new loan program for people that can't afford it, minority loans to people who can't pay them back.  Thomas Perez was also the lawyer in the Justice Department who led the charge against the Arizona immigration law.  So it looks to me like while everybody's focused on all these other things, hello subprime mortgages again, hello granting loans.  This is exactly how it started in the first place.  I know a lot of people want to blame Wall Street, but this is exactly how it started.  Substitute the name Clinton for Obama in here and Janet Reno for Holder, and it's exactly what happened.  And they are threatening all of these people in the banking business with untold investigations and who knows what results they would provide if they don't do this.  And this group, the name of the group, the St. Louis Equal Housing and Community Reinvestment Alliance.  What do you bet that's just ACORN under a new name?  So the cycle is continuing.  Chew on that.
    
Subprime mortgages were the Obama/Soetoro family business.

All of Stanley Ann Dunham's biographies describe the woman as an "anthropologist," but that's just another ObamaLie.  Stanley Ann She was an international banking consultant.  She traveled around Southeast Asia, pursuing a career in international banking and rural development that took her to Ghana, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Nepal and Bangladesh.  She facilitated the practice of  "macrofinancing" -- making subprime loans to people with poor credit and low incomes.  You know the one, exactly what the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac banks were pushing that created the mortgage meltdown.

And sonny-boy picked up where mom left off.

In a 1995 case known as Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank, Obama and his fellow attorneys charged that Citibank was making too few loans to black applicants whose credit was poor and won the case.  When the law forced them to lend money anyway, the inevitable collapse occurred."  As one commentator noted in May 2008, legal "successes" such as this were responsible for the sub-prime mortgage crisis of 2007 AND 2008.
Geithner Predicts Double-Dip If Congress Fails To Lift Debt Ceiling
Stacy Kaper is reporting that Treasury Secretary (and tax-cheat) Tim Geithner said if Congress fails to lift the debt ceiling and the U.S. defaults on its obligations "this abrupt contraction would likely push us into a double dip recession," painting the most explicitly dire prediction to date of the consequences of inaction.

In a heavily-anticipated response to Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., who asked Geithner to document the economic and fiscal impacts of failing to lift the statutory debt limit, the Treasury secretary detailed a chain reaction that would cripple the economy, costing jobs and income.

"A default would inflict catastrophic far-reaching damage on our nation’s economy, significantly reducing growth and increasing unemployment," said Geithner in the letter to Bennet which was dated May 13.  "Even a short-term default could cause irrevocable damage to the economy."

Geithner has imposed an August deadline for Congress to lift the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling, but lawmakers are still negotiating over Republican demands to tie the move to spending cuts.  And a portion of the GOP still remains skeptical about the need to act by the deadline at all, arguing that the consequences have been overstates.

In the letter Geithner walked through the doomsday scenario he has been describing on the Hill.  Default would cast doubt on the full faith and credit of the U.S., which would scare away investors and enable those remaining to demand higher interest rates on Treasury securities, which would have far-reaching negative ramifications.  Increased borrowing costs would extend to families, businesses, and local governments, he said.

Because Treasury securities set the benchmark interest rate for a variety of consumer credit products, an increase in interest rates could drive up the cost on everything from mortgages to car loans and business loans.

A default on our obligations would also sap household wealth, threatening retirement savings; what's more, it could cut off Medicare and Social Security payments and cause another financial crisis, the letter said.

"A default on Treasury debt could lead to concerns about the solvency of the investment and financial institutions that hold Treasury securities in their portfolios, which could cause a run on money market mutual funds and the broader financial system," Geithner said in the letter.

Ultimately he said the biggest threat would be a crisis of confidence in the United States.  Confidence in the America’s ability to meet its obligations creates demand for Treasury securities in the first place, which lowers the borrowing costs for the government and in turn consumers. It has made investments in Treasury securities a safe haven for investors in times of panic.

"A default would call into question the status of Treasury securities as a cornerstone of the financial system, potentially squandering this unique role and the economic benefits that come with it," Geithner said.

Remember this obscure report.  China does hold $1 trillion in US treasuries.
Americans Oppose Raising Debt Ceiling, 47% To 19%
Gallup Chief Economist Dennis Jacobe says By a 47% to 19% margin, Americans say they would want their member of Congress to vote against raising the U.S. debt ceiling, while 34% don't know enough to say.  Republicans oppose raising the debt ceiling by 70% to 8% and independents by 46% to 15%. Democrats favor raising the ceiling by 33% to 26%.
    
    
These results are based on a May 5-8 Gallup poll, which asked Americans about the issue but did not offer reasons for or against raising the debt ceiling.  The Congress is generally expected to pass debt ceiling legislation, although it is unclear what additional provisions will be needed in order to secure passage.

A majority of Americans (57%) say they are closely following the news about "discussions to raise the U.S. debt ceiling, the maximum amount of money the U.S. government can borrow by law."  Republicans are following the issue more closely than are Democrats and independents; upper-income Americans are following it more closely than lower-income Americans; and those with a postgraduate education more so than those with a high school education or less.

Americans are more likely to oppose than favor raising the debt ceiling, regardless of how closely they are following the news about the issue.  Among the 23% who are following the debt ceiling discussion very closely, 62% are opposed and 25% are in favor of raising the current ceiling.  Among those who are following the issue less closely, opposition outnumbers support by at least a 2-to-1 margin

Continue reading here . . .

At least a majority of Democrats were honest in the poll, responding, "Don't know enough to say."  They're far too occupied agitating for more free money.
A Verdict On Obama's "Stimulus" Plan
John Hinderaker says that economists Timothy Conley and Bill Dupor have studied the effects of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), the purported stimulus bill, with great rigor.  Earlier this week, they reported their findings in a paper titled "The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled."  The paper is dense and rather lengthy, and requires considerable study.  Here, however, is the bottom line:
    

Our benchmark results suggest that the ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs.  State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment.  The majority of destroyed/forestalled jobs were in growth industries including health, education, professional and business services.

    
So the American people borrowed and spent close to a trillion dollars to destroy a net of more than one-half million jobs.  Does Obama understand this?  I very much doubt it.  When he expressed puzzlement at the idea that the stimulus money may not have been well-spent, and said that "spending equals stimulus," he betrayed a shocking level of economic ignorance.

This chart, from Conley and Dupor's report, shows how goods-producing industries have completely failed to benefit from ARRA and the Obama administration's other misguided policies; click to enlarge:
     
    
*  HELP -- Health, education, leisure and hospitality and business and professional services (page 10 of .pdf).

One would have to conclude that Obama is either completely incompetent or is purposefully destroying the American economy.  Either way, he gotta go!
Obama's Specious Decree To Business:  Hire Workers Already
Gary Bauer says that after hearing tales of economic woe from unemployed Americans at last Thursday’s town hall event in Washington, D.C., Obama issued a decree to American business: It’s time to "step up" and begin hiring new workers.

It’s as if Obama believes American businesses were just waiting for him to green-light what many companies doubtless would like to do but cannot -- largely because of Obama’s own job-stifling policies.
    
Obama's economic agenda is rooted in the mistaken belief that government can do a better job of picking winners and losers than can the free enterprise system.

But with the unemployment rate climbing back over 9% last month and Obama’s approval rating on the economy dipping to 34% -- the lowest level yet -- American businesses and the public clearly see things differently.

Of course, it’s the voters' job to pick political winners and losers, and if these economic trends continue, Obama may find that his decrees won’t be enough to save his presidency sorry ass.
Obama Is Associated With American Decline
"It seems that almost every bit of data about the health of the U.S. economy has disappointed expectations recently," Mike Riddell, a fund manager at M&G Investments in London, told CNBC yesterday.  "U.S. house prices have fallen by more than 5 percent year on year, pending home sales have collapsed and existing home sales disappointed, the trend of improving jobless claims has arrested, first quarter GDP wasn’t revised upwards by the 0.4 percent forecast, durables goods orders shrank, manufacturing surveys from Philadelphia Fed, Richmond Fed, and Chicago Fed were all very disappointing.  And that’s just in the last week and a bit," Riddell said.

Peter Wehner says the anemic and weakening state of the economy is now dominating the news.  The Wall Street Journal’s front page headline today is, "Economic Outlook Darkens"; the Washington Post headline is, "Few remedies left as recovery’s momentum lags."  And the New York Times front page story on the economy begins this way: "No American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won a second term in office when the unemployment rate on Election Day topped 7.2 percent.  Seventeen months before the next election, it is increasingly clear that Obama must defy that trend to keep his job."

What is so politically dangerous for Obama are three things.  First, his entire presidency has been marred by a sick economy and a stunningly weak recovery (so weak that roughly half of the public believes we’re either still in a recession or now in a depression).  Second, in many key areas the trajectory is getting worse, not better.  And third, the Obama administration made promises early on that have either already been broken (e.g. unemployment will not rise above 8 percent) or cannot possibly keep (cutting the deficit in half, restoring millions of lost jobs, etc.).

Obama has less time than he may think to turn impressions around.  The public is associating Barack Obama’s tenure with American decline.  And that is politically dangerous -- quite possibly politically lethal.

Unless the decline of America was on his agenda -- see next item . . .
Towards The Economic Abyss
Nile Gardner says that after 29 months of the most left-wing presidency in US history, the American superpower is heading towards the economic abyss.

I imagine there are some very worried figures in the White House today, including Obama himself.  Today’s job figures are extremely bad news for his administration, and as I noted in my last post, an electoral disaster for Barack Obama in November 2012 is now looking like a distinct possibility.  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment has risen again to 9.1 percent, with private employers adding a mere 54,000 jobs in May (half at McDonalds).  That’s up from 9 percent in April, and 8.8 percent in March.

The White House’s chief economist Austan Goolsbee has described the figures as a mere "bump in the road."  In reality they should be a massive wake-up call for an administration that refuses to acknowledge the huge damage its big government policies have done to the American economy, with 13.9 million Americans now out of work.

Under Obama unemployment has remained above 8 percent for every single month, with the exception of January 2009 when he entered the Oval Office, rising as high as 10.1 percent in October 2009.  By any measure, this is a terrible track record, and as even The New York Times acknowledged earlier this week, "no American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt has won a second term in office when the unemployment rate on Election Day topped 7.2 percent."

The dire jobs figures are just part of an extraordinarily grim picture for the US economy, nearly two and a half years into his term.  As ABC News reported yesterday, "a cascade of negative economic reports this week is leaving Americans wondering if this is really a recovery from the recession that officially started December 2007 and ended June 2009."  And the housing market, in which 67 percent of Americans have a stake, is in serious trouble, with home prices sinking to their lowest levels since 2002, falling by 4.2 percent in the first quarter of 2011 and for eight straight months in a row.

In addition, the White House is paralyzed in the face of the nation’s towering debts, which reached 62 percent of GDP by the end of 2010, the highest percentage since the end of World War II.  The Congressional Budget Office warned last year in its "alternative fiscal scenario" that "with significantly lower revenues and higher outlays", the federal debt could grow to a staggering 87 percent of GDP by 2020, rising to 109 percent by 2025 and 185 percent in 2035.

It is little wonder that 66 percent of Americans now worry the federal government will finally run out of their money, and Moody’s Investors Service is threatening to downgrade America’s sterling credit rating unless it gets to grips with the debt crisis.  Undoubtedly, the very future of the United States’ position as the word’s only superpower is at stake in the next few years.  And as Congressman Paul Ryan, the Reaganite chairman of the House Budget Committee warned in a superb speech last night to the Alexander Hamilton Society in Washington:

The unsustainable trajectory of government spending is accelerating the nation toward the most predictable economic crisis in American history.  Years of ignoring the real drivers of our debt have left us with a profound structural problem.  In the coming years, our debt is projected to grow to more than three times the size of our entire economy.

This trajectory is catastrophic.  By the end of the decade, we will be spending 20 percent of our tax revenue simply paying interest on the debt -- and that’s according to optimistic projections…  This course is simply unsustainable.  If we continue down our current path, then a debt-fueled economic crisis is not a probability.  It is a mathematical certainty.

Years of profligate spending, massive bailouts and useless stimulus measures have made America poorer, not richer, and threaten the long-term economic foundations of this great country.  Obama’s big government experiment has been a dangerous failure, only further proof that the deadening hand of federal intervention is the last thing America needs at this time.  The United States needs more economic freedom, less government regulation and spending, and lower taxes if it is to create jobs, wealth and prosperity, a message that seems to have been lost on Obama as he drives the United States towards the financial abyss.
Obama Monetary Policy Fueling Pain At The Pump
John Rossomando points out the Obama administration's monetary policies have added approximately 56.5 cents to the price of every gallon of gas you pump, according to a report by Republicans on the congressional Joint Economic Committee report.

Estimates suggest that had the dollar maintained the value it had when Obama came into office, gasoline would cost approximately $3.40 per gallon instead of around $4 per gallon in many parts of the country.

"Analysts and pundits often cite, correctly or incorrectly, the turmoil in the Middle East, a strengthening global economy, or speculation as the causes for the run up in crude oil prices," the report said.  "What is rarely discussed as an important factor in the rise of the dollar price of oil is the role played by the dollar itself."

The report attributes this increase to the Federal Reserve's policy of increasing the money supply through the purchasing trillions worth of bank notes, treasury notes and mortgage-backed securities, known as quantitative easing, which it says has fueled inflation.

Obama publicly defended the Fed's decision to engage in quantitative easing last fall during the G20 Summit in India in the wake of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke's decision to print money to buy back $600 billion worth of government bonds in August 2010.

"It was designed to grow the economy," Obama told Bloomberg, but former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, a former top Obama economic adviser, warned last fall in an interview with Bloomberg that these policies could end up fueling inflation.

Longtime Fed Chief Alan Greenspan had a similar analysis, calling the Obama administration's strategy that of "pursuing a policy of currency weakening."
More Bumps
Last Friday, Obama's chief economist, Austan Goolsbee downplayed a disappointing May jobs report that showed unemployment inched up to 9.1 percent, calling the latest number one of the "bumps on the road to recovery," adding unemployment is still "unacceptably high."

Well, yesterday, Goolsbee, who's been with Obama for years, quit.

And Sam Youngman says the daily economic briefings have disappeared from Obama's White House schedule.

Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs announced at his own first daily briefing reporters that Obama asked for the daily economic briefing, described then as comparable to the daily intelligence briefing the president gets every morning.

"The president asked that this be added every day to his schedule," Gibbs said at the time.  Gibbs added that Obama believed it is "important that each day he receive the most up to date information as it relates to the economy."

But at some point, the daily economic briefings stopped showing up on Obama's daily schedule.

Related:  Obama's rating on economy hits new low

Who wants to hear bad news day after day when Obama could be golfing.  Politico is reporting that Obama has played 71 rounds of golf since occupying the Oval Office and still can't break 90.
Obama's Jobs Plan Takes A Page From Marx
Investor's Business Daily says Obama has unveiled a plan to cut joblessness with an industrial policy from the 19th century.  In this "new" economy, government will pick winners and losers for industry.  It didn't work then, it won't work now.

Taking a cue from classical Marxist theory as well as vintage union organizing doctrine, both discounting the value of service work over manufacturing, we now see Obama touting training for factory jobs over all others, pushing government spending in that area and calling it a jobs recovery plan.

"I see a future where we train workers who make things here in the United States, and continue a important and honorable tradition of folks working with their hands, creating value, not just shuffling paper," he said Wednesday at Northern Virginia Community College, urging students to pack up and go to ... Detroit.

As he announced his public-private "Skills for America" partnership to train and credential 500,000 students for jobs in industries favored by the Obama administration, it bears looking at how at odds this approach is to both history and economic reality.

"We know it means building the infrastructure, the roads and bridges, and manufacturing new products here ... that create good jobs," Obama said.  "Above all, it means training and educating our citizens to out-compete workers from other countries."

The Bill Moyers crowd has been touting manufacturing-era nostalgia for years, claiming the world would go back on its axis if America could just shut its market and put everyone back into blue collars, turning gears and listening for the lunch whistle.

Fact is, the more advanced the economy, the greater percentage of the work force that moves out of manufacturing and into services.

Economists call this the "tertiary progression" of development -- from farming and fishing, to the Industrial Revolution, to an advanced service economy.  Every rich nation has followed this path -- every one.

In the U.S., that move started not last decade but more than 70 years ago.  In the U.S. there are six times more service workers than factory workers, boasting higher skills and per capita income.  U.S. trade data consistently show U.S. surpluses in service exports across the board because that's America's competitive advantage.

Now Obama wants us to "give back" all that white collar development and return to a simpler sort of economy premised on manufacturing -- one that's more characteristic of today's China or Peru than a developed economy such as America.

Continue reading here . . .

In Obama's scheme of things the training of 500,000 "students" has more to do with indoctrination than the transfer of job skills.
Professor Disaster
Michael A. Walsh says Obama's theories are killing the economy.

No billions or trillions needed.  Here's the simplest number to describe the dismal state of the US economy -- one!

With the departure of chief economic adviser Austan Goolsbee, that's the number of members from the original Obama economic team still working for the administration, not quite three years into the first term.  Gone are Christina Romer, Larry Summers, Peter Orszag.  Headed out is Goolsbee, who abruptly announced his resignation Monday to return to teaching at the University of Chicago.

The Rats are saying goodbye to the ship of state.  With the water lapping over the gunwales, the lone holdout is Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, the former tax cheat, who sails grimly on.

The government racked up $5.3 trillion in new fiscal obligations last year alone -- bringing the current unfunded tab for future expenses on things like Medicare, Social Security and military medical and retirement programs to a whopping $61.6 trillion, or $534,000 per American household.

Then there's today's bills: We're borrowing $125 billion a month that we have no hope of ever paying back on our current course.

The growth in GDP declined to a measly 1.8 percent in the first quarter of 2011 as consumers hung desperately onto their wallets.  Job growth has completely collapsed.  Fully 60 percent of the electorate thinks the country is on the wrong track.  No wonder the daily economic briefing, once on a par with the intelligence briefing, has vanished from Obama's schedule.

And now Obama says he's not worried about a double-dip recession.

Continue reading here . . .
Economy Will Doom Obama
Dick Morris And Eileen McGann say that we are only now just beginning to see the true dimensions of the economic damage Obama has inflicted on the nation.  Will he get re-elected?  Not with what’s happening to the economy before our eyes.

Washington is operating on a full forward throttle of monetary stimulus and carrying a $1.5 trillion deficit and still we are creeping along at a growth rate of under two percent.

But the signs are that things are about to get much worse:
    

•  The OPEC nations are determined to hold the price of oil above $100.

•  The Fed is about to end the massive printing of money called Qualitative Easing-2 on June 30, contracting the money supply.

•  A growth rate of under two percent triggers higher unemployment since it is less than the combined rate of population growth and worker productivity.

•  Interest rates are set to rise as the US needs to borrow money from real lenders as QE-2 ends.

•  Inflation is gripping China at the same time that its real estate bubble is bursting, impairing China as an engine of economic growth.

    
Can Obama get re-elected with stagflation like we saw in the 70s?  Could Carter?  But the massive printing of money by the Fed in the past two years is similar to that which Nixon used to hold up the economy in the early 70s.  And the stagflation we are about to witness will be equal to that which ensued.

With 47% approving of the job Obama is doing according to the new Washington Post poll but only 40% approving of his economic record, his ratings are bound to fall.  And to keep falling until Election Day.  Any good Republican will take him out.
Obama On Unemployment:  Ignorance, Arrogance & Blame
Carole says another day another example of how, when it comes to job growth, Barack Obama either doesn't get it or thinks the American people don't.  In his weekly radio address he once again touted more government spending as a way to improve the nation's dismal unemployment situation.

Referring to the American Graduation Initiative, a 10-year, $12 billion plan to invest in community colleges which he unveiled last week, Obama declared, "If you're a company that's hiring, you'll know that anyone who has this degree has the skills you're looking for.  If you're a student considering community college, you'll know that your diploma will give you a leg up in the job market."

This latest throw-other-people's-money-at-the-problem-and-put-the-nation-even-deeper-in-debt plan might be something to consider if:
    

1.  American companies did not possess the ability to determine whether or not someone is qualified to work for them, and

2.  The 9.1 percent national unemployment rate was caused by a lack of qualified workers to fill a surplus of jobs available

    
Neither is true but worse than simply being false:
    

1.  Insinuating the first shows complete ignorance of and arrogance toward those who actually create jobs, and

2.  Insinuating the second shows a pathetic attempt to blame the unemployment problem on the unemployed themselves rather than on the administration's job killing policies.

    
In the Republicans' weekly address, Representative Adam Kinzinger (R-Illinois) took on those policies saying that "taxes are too high, regulations are too burdensome, and the government won’t stop spending money it doesn’t have."  He went on to offer legitimate solutions saying, "The road to refueling our economy and creating jobs means tackling our debt head on, simplifying the tax code, reining in Washington's red tape factory, passing pending trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea, and increasing domestic energy production, making our nation more energy secure, which would help lower costs at the pump and create jobs here at home." (source)

Practical solutions to provide an economic environment that would free the private sector to create new jobs or more wasteful government spending and interference to inhibit job growth while blaming the unemployed for their plight?  The choice between the two parties has never been clearer.
Obama -- By The Numbers


In this infographic, JohnnyShop took a look at various statements and promises made by Barack Obama (and a few others) during both the 2008 campaign and early on in his presidency.  These statements were then set against current statistics and those from inauguration day or 2008 for annual stats.
Comments . . .
***  
 

©  Copyright  Beckwith  2011

All right reserved