President Obama is asking for even more tax dollars this week for his failed stimulus policies yet his first trillion-dollar stimulus already promised massive spending on infrastructure that would put people back to work.
Didn't happen. The massive spending on infrastructure or the putting people back to work.
Now Obama says putting the taxpayer on the hook for borrowing billions more and then spending those billions on infrastructure is the ticket to pulling the economy out of its Obamanomics nosedive.
“This will not only create jobs immediately, it’s also going to make our economy hum over the long haul,” Obama said of his new borrowing and spending plan in his Labor Day speech to a Big Labor union audience.
Yet a senior White House official told reporters on a conference call the very same day, “We’re not like trying to put out an idea today that in October 2010, this is going to create a lot of jobs. This is not what this is.”
So which is it? Will borrowing and spending billions more on the president’s Big Labor union leadership buddies “create jobs immediately,” as Obama said? Or is that “not what this is”?
And will anyone in the Obama administration ever tell us what it really is without the doublespeak?
Judging by history, it’s not likely.
The first stimulus bill was sold as spending on “shovel ready” projects to provide the jobs that would put millions of people back to work.
According to Recovery.gov, the President’s own website which accounts for the stimulus funding (ahem), of the first $787 billion stimulus bill, a full $275 billion has gone un-spent as of August 27, 2010. And of the $512 billion of stimulus already spent, only $18.5 billion (less than seven percent) has been paid out by the Department of Transportation on these “shovel ready” jobs.
Let me repeat that: less than seven percent has gone for the promised transportation infrastructure.
Showing posts with label Obamanomics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Obamanomics. Show all posts
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Monday, August 9, 2010
Stimulus "an extraordinary waste of borrowed money" that did little more than line the pockets of White House political allies
It's no coincidence that Christina Romer, chairwoman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, announced her retirement the day before Friday's brutal unemployment report. With 131,000 more jobs lost in July, and downward revisions of 97,000 for the previous two months, it's easy to see why she would start looking for the exits.
Romer is best known for drafting the February 2009 report "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan," which the White House used as an ammunition belt in the fight to gain passage of its $862 billion economic stimulus bill (the actual cost of which exceeds $1 trillion when interest is included). Romer predicted that following passage of the stimulus bill, unemployment would plateau below 8 percent last fall and by this month register at 7 percent. That's not close enough for government work, as unemployment stands at 9.5 percent today. It would be higher except that hundreds of thousands of frustrated job seekers have given up looking for new jobs and dropped out of the labor force.
Predictably, the stimulus bill has proven to be an extraordinary waste of borrowed money that has failed to create jobs, generate economic growth or do much of anything other than line the pockets of White House political allies. That and give $308 million in subsidies to BP before the Gulf oil spill disaster, and subsidize a study on what happens when monkeys snort coke.
As Romer fades back to her teaching post at Berkeley, Obama is adding to the economic misery by creating an environment of regulatory uncertainty. The Wall Street reform law Obama recently signed potentially requires 533 new regulations, 60 studies and 93 reports, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Obama's Environmental Protection Agency has 29 active rulemakings, and there are 100 new rules on the Labor Department's agenda and 26 at the Transportation Department.
Add Obama's determination to raise everybody's taxes by allowing the Bush cuts from 2001 and 2003 to expire Jan. 1, 2011, and it's easy to why banks, businesses and consumers are hoarding trillions of dollars that could otherwise spur economic growth. And we haven't even addressed the destructive effect on economic growth of Obama's nationalization of major portions of the economy, including the banks, health care and the auto industry.
The economy is stalling, unemployment seems stuck at European levels of idleness, the federal deficit and the national debt are at historic highs, public confidence in Congress is at its lowest-ever level and big majorities of Mainstream Americans say Obama has the country on the wrong path. Obamanomics has failed miserably and it's time for everybody in this town to admit it so we can move on.
Romer is best known for drafting the February 2009 report "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan," which the White House used as an ammunition belt in the fight to gain passage of its $862 billion economic stimulus bill (the actual cost of which exceeds $1 trillion when interest is included). Romer predicted that following passage of the stimulus bill, unemployment would plateau below 8 percent last fall and by this month register at 7 percent. That's not close enough for government work, as unemployment stands at 9.5 percent today. It would be higher except that hundreds of thousands of frustrated job seekers have given up looking for new jobs and dropped out of the labor force.
Predictably, the stimulus bill has proven to be an extraordinary waste of borrowed money that has failed to create jobs, generate economic growth or do much of anything other than line the pockets of White House political allies. That and give $308 million in subsidies to BP before the Gulf oil spill disaster, and subsidize a study on what happens when monkeys snort coke.
As Romer fades back to her teaching post at Berkeley, Obama is adding to the economic misery by creating an environment of regulatory uncertainty. The Wall Street reform law Obama recently signed potentially requires 533 new regulations, 60 studies and 93 reports, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Obama's Environmental Protection Agency has 29 active rulemakings, and there are 100 new rules on the Labor Department's agenda and 26 at the Transportation Department.
Add Obama's determination to raise everybody's taxes by allowing the Bush cuts from 2001 and 2003 to expire Jan. 1, 2011, and it's easy to why banks, businesses and consumers are hoarding trillions of dollars that could otherwise spur economic growth. And we haven't even addressed the destructive effect on economic growth of Obama's nationalization of major portions of the economy, including the banks, health care and the auto industry.
The economy is stalling, unemployment seems stuck at European levels of idleness, the federal deficit and the national debt are at historic highs, public confidence in Congress is at its lowest-ever level and big majorities of Mainstream Americans say Obama has the country on the wrong path. Obamanomics has failed miserably and it's time for everybody in this town to admit it so we can move on.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Obama's speeches are starting to resemble Aesop's Fables
More than 30 months after the official start of the recession, the economy is still losing jobs, with non-farm payroll employment declining by 125,000 jobs in June. A total of 652,000 workers fled the workforce in June, and therefore were no longer counted as unemployed, which is why the unemployment rate fell from 9.7% to 9.5%. That follows 322,000 who dropped out of the workforce in May, for a total of nearly a million workers dropping out of the labor force in the last two months alone. If those million workers had remained in the workforce looking for work, the unemployment rate would be 10.1%.
Moreover, average hours worked per week dropped for all workers, as did average hourly earnings.
But there was President Obama in a highly revealing speech on June 30 in Racine, Wisconsin, congratulating himself for having saved America from another Great Depression. He said, "Now every economist who has looked at it has said that the Recovery Act [stimulus bill] did its job," starting a passage that will soon be memorialized as another chapter in Aesop's Fables. As Obama said those words, on the very same day in the Wall Street Journal was a commentary by Allan Meltzer, Professor of Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, entitled, "Why Obamanomics Has Failed." Maybe Obama just hadn't read the Journal yet that day.
But Obama continued in Racine, "[The stimulus bill] put a brake on the collapse of the economy. We avoided a Great Depression. We are now growing again." (Emphasis added.)
Instead of avoiding a Great Depression, however, President Obama is leading us into one.
Moreover, average hours worked per week dropped for all workers, as did average hourly earnings.
But there was President Obama in a highly revealing speech on June 30 in Racine, Wisconsin, congratulating himself for having saved America from another Great Depression. He said, "Now every economist who has looked at it has said that the Recovery Act [stimulus bill] did its job," starting a passage that will soon be memorialized as another chapter in Aesop's Fables. As Obama said those words, on the very same day in the Wall Street Journal was a commentary by Allan Meltzer, Professor of Economics at Carnegie Mellon University, entitled, "Why Obamanomics Has Failed." Maybe Obama just hadn't read the Journal yet that day.
But Obama continued in Racine, "[The stimulus bill] put a brake on the collapse of the economy. We avoided a Great Depression. We are now growing again." (Emphasis added.)
Instead of avoiding a Great Depression, however, President Obama is leading us into one.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Monday, August 17, 2009
Screwball economics drives Obama on health care
"Americans are being urged to worry about the nation spending 17% of its gross domestic product each year on health care—a higher percentage than any other country. Addressing the American Medical Association in June, Barack Obama said, "Make no mistake: The cost of our health care is a threat to our economy." But the president is mistaken. Japan spends 8% of its GDP on health care—the same as Zimbabwe. South Korea and Haiti both spend 6%. Monaco spends 5%, which is what Afghanistan spends. Do all of these countries have economies that are less "threatened" than that of the U.S.?
No. So there must be other factors that affect the health of a nation's economy.
Mr. Obama has said that "the cost of health care has weighed down our economy." No one thinks the 20% of our GDP that's attributable to manufacturing is weighing down the economy, because it's intuitively clear that one person's expenditure on widgets is another person's income. But the same is true of the health-care industry. The $2.4 trillion Americans spend each year for health care doesn't go up in smoke. It's paid to other Americans."
No. So there must be other factors that affect the health of a nation's economy.
Mr. Obama has said that "the cost of health care has weighed down our economy." No one thinks the 20% of our GDP that's attributable to manufacturing is weighing down the economy, because it's intuitively clear that one person's expenditure on widgets is another person's income. But the same is true of the health-care industry. The $2.4 trillion Americans spend each year for health care doesn't go up in smoke. It's paid to other Americans."
Saturday, July 11, 2009
U.S. losing competetive edge against Europe
"There's no question that current government policies for taxes, spending and regulation are causing the United States to lose competitiveness in the global race for capital, prosperity and growth.
Of course, China has been moving in the direction of free-market capitalism for years. To some extent, this shows the positive benefits of America's free-trade policies and its open-mindedness in helping nurture not only Chinese growth, but also middle-class prosperity worldwide.
But what's particularly galling about Obamanomics is that we may well be losing our competitive edge with Europe. While Europe is ever so slightly moving toward Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the United States is shifting toward an overtaxed and overregulated model that smacks of Francois Mitterrand. That's something no one should want to tolerate."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/11/the_road_to_economic_demoralization_--_washington_is_going_the_wrong_way_97403.html
Of course, China has been moving in the direction of free-market capitalism for years. To some extent, this shows the positive benefits of America's free-trade policies and its open-mindedness in helping nurture not only Chinese growth, but also middle-class prosperity worldwide.
But what's particularly galling about Obamanomics is that we may well be losing our competitive edge with Europe. While Europe is ever so slightly moving toward Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, the United States is shifting toward an overtaxed and overregulated model that smacks of Francois Mitterrand. That's something no one should want to tolerate."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/07/11/the_road_to_economic_demoralization_--_washington_is_going_the_wrong_way_97403.html
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
As raid on taxpayers grows, value of AIG tumbles
"In September 2008, Geithner engineered the government's purchase of an 80% share in AIG for the handsome sum of $85 billion, the amount necessary to prevent the company from entering bankruptcy. Losses continued to mount, however, and more federal dollars were needed.
Total cost of AIG's bailout to date? A staggering $185 billion -- or roughly $1400 per U.S. taxpayer. Yet today, according to AIG's own numbers, the company is worth less than $6 billion, and this after posting the largest quarterly loss in corporate history. Nevertheless, the problems at AIG extend beyond the balance sheets.
In March of this year, we learned what the Obama administration already knew -- that after receiving bailout funds, AIG paid $165 million in executive bonuses to employees of its troubled financial products division. Additionally, more than $30 billion in counterparty payments were made to Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Wachovia -- all of which received separate bailout funds directly from the government -- and foreign banks like Deutsche Bank, Société Générale and UBS, who received counterparty payments in excess of $50 billion.
The public was beyond outrage. They were sold something they didn't want for more than it was worth in a midnight fire sale of busted corporations over-leveraged in troubled, toxic assets. And yet, taxpayers are still kept in the dark about the management of their controlling interest in AIG."
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/a-tale-of-two-treasuries
Total cost of AIG's bailout to date? A staggering $185 billion -- or roughly $1400 per U.S. taxpayer. Yet today, according to AIG's own numbers, the company is worth less than $6 billion, and this after posting the largest quarterly loss in corporate history. Nevertheless, the problems at AIG extend beyond the balance sheets.
In March of this year, we learned what the Obama administration already knew -- that after receiving bailout funds, AIG paid $165 million in executive bonuses to employees of its troubled financial products division. Additionally, more than $30 billion in counterparty payments were made to Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Wachovia -- all of which received separate bailout funds directly from the government -- and foreign banks like Deutsche Bank, Société Générale and UBS, who received counterparty payments in excess of $50 billion.
The public was beyond outrage. They were sold something they didn't want for more than it was worth in a midnight fire sale of busted corporations over-leveraged in troubled, toxic assets. And yet, taxpayers are still kept in the dark about the management of their controlling interest in AIG."
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/06/08/a-tale-of-two-treasuries
Monday, March 23, 2009
Chinese sell us condoms, taxpayers get screwed
Talk about symmetry.
The U.S. government is going to start buying condoms from China, leaving homegrown manufacturers deflated.
This will provide the Chinese a new source of U.S. dollars, which the Obama administration obviously hopes they will use to buy more U.S bonds to finance Obama's huge borrowing plans.
Down the line, both the dollar and the condoms will inflate.
But it is U.S. taxpayers who will get screwed.
The U.S. government is going to start buying condoms from China, leaving homegrown manufacturers deflated.
This will provide the Chinese a new source of U.S. dollars, which the Obama administration obviously hopes they will use to buy more U.S bonds to finance Obama's huge borrowing plans.
Down the line, both the dollar and the condoms will inflate.
But it is U.S. taxpayers who will get screwed.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Dollar weakens, raising the cost of imports to U.S.
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- The dollar dropped the most against the currencies of six major U.S. trading partners since the Plaza Accord almost a quarter-century ago as the Federal Reserve’s plan to purchase Treasuries spurred speculation that it’s debasing the greenback.
“What it introduces is the problem of the currency to the extent that the Fed is buying what isn’t desired by foreign holders,” said Bill Gross, co-chief investment officer of Pacific Investment Management Co., in an interview on Bloomberg Television on March 19. “The Fed can keep interest rates where they want to keep them, at least for a 6- to 12- to 18-month period of time, but it will have consequences down the road.”
The U.S. currency weakened beyond $1.37 per euro this week for the first time since January as the central bank’s decision to increase its balance sheet by $1.15 trillion lowered yields, making American assets less attractive. The Norwegian krone and the New Zealand dollar rallied as the Fed’s move spurred advances in commodities.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNdu22y30zwc&refer=worldwide
“What it introduces is the problem of the currency to the extent that the Fed is buying what isn’t desired by foreign holders,” said Bill Gross, co-chief investment officer of Pacific Investment Management Co., in an interview on Bloomberg Television on March 19. “The Fed can keep interest rates where they want to keep them, at least for a 6- to 12- to 18-month period of time, but it will have consequences down the road.”
The U.S. currency weakened beyond $1.37 per euro this week for the first time since January as the central bank’s decision to increase its balance sheet by $1.15 trillion lowered yields, making American assets less attractive. The Norwegian krone and the New Zealand dollar rallied as the Fed’s move spurred advances in commodities.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aNdu22y30zwc&refer=worldwide
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
