The cover of Newsweek Magazine blares out “HIT THE ROAD, BARACK. Why We Need a New President” In the article behind the cover Niall Ferguson expresses the sentiments of many people with this comment.
Despite having been—full disclosure—an adviser to John McCain, I acknowledged his opponent’s remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.
Yet the question confronting the country nearly four years later is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.
Actually the sad truth is Obama has delivered on his promises. He promised in a speech to union members that he would establish us on the road to single payer (government only) healthcare, and he did. He promised the folks at ACORN that he would put their interests first and he did. He promised to completely transform America and he has made progress on that front too. He may very well complete the job if re-elected. He never did say he would get it all done in the first term.
There were, of course some promises he did not keep. The oceans have not changed their habits. The coal industry still exists. He has not created a domestic police force larger than the military. He didn’t bring the troops home immediately from Afghanistan as he said he would and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed did not get to see New York City.
Why are so many people disappointed in his jobs performance? Obama’s economic policies are what you should expect when you put a socialist in charge. He said in his book that he only had one job in the private sector and he considered it to be “working for the enemy.” Did you think he would focus on helping the enemy create jobs? In his campaign he stressed his experience as a community organizer. An organizer’s job is to agitate one group so they will be angry enough to confront another group. Did you think he would be a uniter? I think I know why you are disappointed. You didn’t do your homework.
“People know that vast personal incomes come not only through the effort or ability or luck of those who receive them, but also because of the opportunities for advantage which Government itself contributes. Therefore, the duty rests upon the Government to restrict such incomes by very high taxes.”
Who said that? It was not our current president. Here’s a clue – It was the only President in our history who presided over an even longer economic recovery than Barack Obama. It was Franklin Delano Roosevelt in an address to Congress in 1935. It is no coincidence that the economic policies of both presidents failed. Minds that think alike produce results that look alike. Roosevelt ordered thousands of young pigs to be destroyed to raise the price of pork – in a depression! Obama ordered thousands of serviceable cars destroyed which raised the cost of transportation for lower income families — in a recession.
As the opening quote attests, Roosevelt sought to siphon money from the employer class to pay for federal government programs. Obama seeks to do the same. Roosevelt’s plan for recovery was to put people to work on the taxpayer’s payroll, not in the private sector. See the CCC and WPA. Obama’s plan is to rebuild roads and bridges (WPA) and subsidize unprofitable environmental programs like the Solyndra (CCC).
Roosevelt took measures later declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. See The Schechter Brothers and the NRA (National Industrial Recovery Act). Obama has also been at odds with the Supreme Court. Both presidents felt restrained by the Court, as well they should. The Court is there to protect the people from an overreaching government. Both presidents sought powers beyond those stipulated by our founders, albeit for different reasons.
When two presidents think so much alike and manage economic recoveries with results that are so much alike, it’s not coincidence. It’s because their policies don’t work. And what are those different reasons? Roosevelt’s goal was to restore the economy and benefit lower income workers. He just didn’t know how to do it. Obama’s goal is to put a choker on capitalism and completely transform America. He knows what he is doing. It’s up to the voters not to let him do it.
Posted in Economy, Opinion, Political philosophy, Political polemics
Tagged economic recovery, jobs, National Industrial Recovery Act, Obama, Roosevelt, Solyndra, Supreme Court, unemployment
Unemployment has been 8% or higher for the last 41 months and Barack Obama said in Ohio on Friday that the country is headed in the right direction. If that’s the case, I have to ask just where it is he thinks we should go?
The U6 number which includes would-be workers who have given up and dropped off the stats is pushing very close to 15%. The country hasn’t experienced such economic malaise lasting this long since the Great Depression, literally.
Increasing taxes on the rich won’t create jobs. Adding an immeasurable cost of doing business with a health care plan when we still don’t know what’s in it won’t create jobs. Blocking energy programs like the Keystone Pipeline and placing moratoriums on drilling in the Gulf doesn’t create jobs. Subsidizing green energy programs like Solyndra hasn’t created any net jobs. The Joint Economic Committee led by Congressman Kevin Brady issued a report saying that the Obama recovery now ranks dead last in modern times. Spending stimulus, housing bailouts, auto bailouts, financial bailouts, cash for clunkers, extending unemployment benefits and $5 trillion in deficit spending left the Obama recovery dead last in modern times.
If you are a President, how do you create jobs? You don’t. Business creates jobs; you clear the road stand aside and cheer. You don’t stand in the middle, over-regulate and jeer — and then blame the lack of progress on your predecessor.
A combination of the success of the free market system and gradual increase of government largess has all but eliminated depression style poverty. The poverty argument no longer engenders the same level of anger when those classed as poor have cell phones and iPads, drive cars, own homes and still pay no income tax.
Today’s anger is not about poverty; it’s about riches. The Wall Street protesters are not fighting poverty; they are protesting the unequal distribution of wealth. They are protesting the fact that some people have more than they do and they want some of it. All you need to do to see why the Occupiers have less is to examine a cross section of them and compare it a cross section of Tea Party types, or upper East-side New York liberals for that matter.
All the rich want to do is keep some of their own money and pay out the rest in taxes and give some to charity. They don’t want to take money from someone else just because someone else has it. Wanting more money may be greed, but isn’t wanting someone else’s money without earning it an even greater greed? The Occupiers want someone else’s money. And they want it to they can buy the latest iPods and better cars. If they really want to end greed they should get a job.
Image via Wikipedia
Quote of the day
”The truth is we have too few jobs today because government stands in the way. If I’m an employer, why would I want to hire someone when Congress and the Labor Department have so many rules that I might not be able to fire that person if he can’t do the job? Why would I take a risk on an investment when still-to-be-written rules about Obamacare, financial regulation and the environment could turn my good idea into a losing venture?” John Stossel
From the You-Can’t-Make-This-Stuff-Up Department
The State of Oregon was a five million dollar gold star by the Obama administration for putting more people on the Food Stamp program. This is not to cover the cost, mind you; it’s a cash bonus for performance. What’s next, a ten million dollar reward to New York if they increase the crime rate?
The skids are being Greeced and the European Union will slip by without breaking up – this time. That’s our opinion, but it’s a squeaker. It certainly wasn’t conservative policies of spending within your means or rule of law that got the European nations into their mess. But it’s conservative policies that will get the public blame. The left will see to that. Sarkozy of France and Merkel of Germany are in big trouble with the voters already and the final deal is yet to be signed.
Dear Mr. President,
Here is my plan for fixing the economy.
There are about 40 million people over 50 in the work force. Pay each of them 1 million dollars tax free severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:
1) They MUST retire.
Forty million new job openings – Unemployment fixed.
2) They MUST buy a house or pay off their mortgage.
Housing Crisis fixed.
3) They MUST buy a new American made car.
Auto Industry fixed.
4) They MUST travel abroad and talk quietly in restaurants.
The reputation of Americans in Europe fixed.
You put 535 million dollars into just one corporation, Solyndra, and it didn’t create a single positive job. In fact, Solyndra was responsible for 1,100 negative jobs when your friends closed up the shop after they got the money. My plan creates positive jobs and will pay for itself by taking millions off the unemployment rolls, turning them from tax receivers to tax payers. (Don’t do the math. The President doesn’t. Why should we?)
If more money is needed, have all the members of your administration and Congress pay their taxes.
Sincerely yours, a man over 50
Posted in Satire
Tagged Economy, jobs, Obama
It’s eight o’clock in the morning on the day of THE BIG JOBS SPEECH. My neck is stuck way out. I am going to predict what The Man is going and not going to say. When I went to school, anything above 65% was passing. Let’s see how I do on this one.
According to the advanced billing the raison d’être of the speech is to promote the creation of jobs. But the speech itself will be about the support and expansion of government, both federal and state. Obama will call for $300,000,000,000 (300 B) with much of it slated for infrastructure. Infrastructure is in the government domain. We heard this plan two years and a few billion dollars ago. It didn’t work then and it won’t now. Or as Yogi Berra might say – It didn’t work the first time and you can’t stop it from not working again.
”The definition of an Obama is someone who keeps repeating the same mistake over and over, each time expecting a different result.” Al Einstein, from Brooklyn
Perhaps the President thinks it will work this time because the shovels have had more time to get ready. Franklin Roosevelt’s shovels were ready. He tried the infrastructure approach with his Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) Camps. The result — unemployment stood at 15.3% at the end of 1936, four years after he was elected. It was still 14.6% at the end of his second term, a full eight years in office.
Obama will urge Congress to establish an Infrastructure Bank, a sort of Fannie Mae for bridges and tunnels.
Another passel of dollars out of the 300B will be earmarked for distribution to states to prop up their finances, presumably to all 57 of them. Favor will be given to those states in the poorest financial conditions because they need it most. True, they need it most, but some would say they deserve it least. Their circumstances are the consequence of their own governance. Bailouts enable the perpetuation of faulty governance by one at the expense of the others.
“Stimulus”? Obama will not use the word. It is in the process of being replaced. Give me a Mulligan on this one. One or two off-hand references don’t count.
The President will not fail to stoke the fires of class resentment at some point in his talk.
Although medium and small business is the cradle of jobs, no more than lip service will be given to ease the obstacles that lay in the way their growth.
There’s more, but there’s also a deadline. Let’s see how I do with the predictions given thus far.