James Pethokoukis

Politics and policy from inside Washington

Obama’s bad economic bet may ruin Democrats

October 29, 2009

The anemic third-quarter U.S. GDP report is another indication that President Barack Obama’s economic gamble may yet fail to pay off. And that could be terrible news for Democrats heading into the 2010 midterm elections.

While the new report showed the economy shifting into recovery mode, it looks like a pretty anemic expansion. As the economics team at IHS Global Insight see things, temporary factors such as cash for clunkers (accounting for nearly half of the past quarter’s growth) and the homebuyers tax credit artificially inflated growth during the past three months. The firm puts underlying growth in the economy at closer to 2 percent than the 3.5 percent.

See, back at the start of 2009, the new White House team wagered that it could construct a stimulus plan that would both boost the economy, helping Democrats in the 2010 midterms, and serve as a significant down-payment on its long-term policy agenda in areas like clean energy and education. That would help Obama in 2012.

It’s a lot to ask of one plan, even a $787 billion one.

Of course, the task would have been easier had the administration gone with a $1.2 trillion stimulus option suggested by White House adviser Christina Romer. But worried that the deluxe option would stall in Congress while also spooking global bond vigilantes, Team Obama went with the mid-sized approach.

The administration didn’t count on the recession being far worse than it anticipated, driving the unemployment rate toward double digits. So while the stimulus plan was effective enough to help nudge the economy away from depression in the second quarter — it’s tough to spend a trillion dollars with absolutely zero short-term impact — and into mild recovery mode during the third, it wasn’t nearly powerful enough to ignite a V-shaped recovery.

Indeed, during the first quarter of the last 10 economic recoveries, real GDP rose a far more impressive 5.8 percent on average. For instance, the first five quarters of the Reagan Boom coming out of the 1981-82 recession showed GDP growth of 8.1 percent, 9.3 percent, 8.1 percent, 8.5 percent,  and 8.0 percent.

There was another, better path Obama could have taken. In a new study, Harvard economists Alberto Alesina and Silvia Ardagna conclude that fiscal stimuli based upon tax cuts are more likely to increase growth than those based upon spending increases. The Obama stimulus was two-thirds spending and one-third tax cuts or credits. And of course tax cuts thought more permanent by Americans could have produced a large impact on working, savings and investing – and powerful economic growth.

Romer herself has conducted research showing the economic oomph that tax cuts produce. And there’s research from economist Robert Barro who found that “a one-percentage-point cut in the average marginal tax rate raises the following year’s GDP growth rate by around 0.6 percent per year.”

As it is, Democrats are saddled with an economy that may not grow fast enough over the next year to substantially bring down the unemployment rate, if at all. So now there is a new wager in Washington: Just how bad will Democrat losses be next year?

Comments

The problem with James is that he has no credibility. He has been calling for a recession since 2007.James Pethokoukis Predicts a 2011 Recessionhttp://angrybear.blogspot.com/2 007/02/fiscal-policy-james-pethokoukis.h tmlSo it makes sense that James would try his best to rain on any good news right now in order to save face. If there is growth in 2011 James is done…Read some of the articles by James Pethokoukis and you will see that he doesn’t want a recovery. He needs a recession right now even if it HURTS AMERICANS!http://www.usnews.com/Topics/t ag/Author/p/james_pethokoukis/index.html He was originally against everything Hillary when he unwittingly thought she was going to be President. Once he lost that he decided to turn to attacking the current President.This is what happens when you have every Tom, Dick and Harry masquerading as a journalist. If Americans want a recovery we can’t be depending on hacks fear-mongering us!

Posted by Morris | Report as abusive
 

Oh yay! This article belongs on a VH1 episode of ‘I love the 80′s.’ Tax-cut-tax-cut-tax-cut! If only we had more, they would solve all of the world’s problems!Past a certain point, the cost-benefit of tax cuts isn’t worth the trouble. It’s called diminishing returns. If you want to slash and burn the entire federal budget to stave off .5% unemployment…be my guest.I mean, why consider the fact that most empirical studies show the effect of tax cuts on employment to be small? That’d sound too much like reality, wouldn’t it? Can’t have too much of that.

Posted by lol | Report as abusive
 

The ‘stimulus’ bill could have been $2T and it STILL would not have worked. It wasn’t ‘stimulus’. It was just pork spread out over a four year period.Remember that weeks after the ‘stimulus’ bill there was another $400B in pork attached to a Budget bill. And that is on top of the three ‘stimulus’ bills passed in 2008 (which Obama also signed and advocated for) including the one which was supposed to fix housing prices.Stimulus has to be directed as something to stimulate it. You can’t just dump money out of a freaking plane and expect that the whole economy is going to bounce back. It’s just a recipe for a massive wave of inflation in 2010/11 which is going to wipe out whatever assets weren’t lost in 2008.Romer was right. She was right BEFORE she joined Obama. Back when she was telling the truth. Back before she was made to go out and lie about what was going to happen and what has already happened regarding this Freshman Year Econ policies.And putting $4T in extra liquidity into the market by the Fed wasn’t infinitely more effective than the measly few hundred billion the ‘stimulus’ has actually gotten out of D.C.?? Get real. We ‘stimulated’ the same state-level idiots who blew up their own budgets by backfilling potholes in welfare, uninsurance funds and school districts. Nobody ‘gained’ any jobs and we got no increase in efficiency, productivity OR economic base. We just kept the failing parts of the economy from having to deal with their failures for one more year.

Posted by bruce stravinsky | Report as abusive
 

Bring on more of other people’s money, Obama! It’ll work this time! His people are sounding like the Microsoft guy on the latest round of Mac commercials…”Trust me…this time it’ll be different!”Last time I checked they put Madoff in jail for this kind of scheme. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain….What a bunch of nothing. We were promised 8% unemployment, we have 10%. We were promised change, we have a third George Bush term. Spend, spend, spend, spend, spend. It’s only money; we can print more.

Posted by TM | Report as abusive
 

Why can’t Obama and his aids look into the past to find a model that has worked. The model for recovery that he is following is doomed to failure. I wish he would protect our dollars as the world currency. I wish he would tell about the good things America has done. Most of all I wish he would stop spending our children s money.

Posted by peter troncale | Report as abusive
 

I was a professor of Economics for several years in an MBA program. During that time I searched in vain for a single, peer reviewed academic research paper that even remotely suggested that s stimulus worked. Even my friends of Keynes have failed to produce one. In fact, I have failed to find evidence that a stimulus, other than a tax cut, that has ever worked in the history of the world. Thinking that my Senators, who voted for the Porkulus Bill, knew something that I did not; I asked them for the research they had used in order for them to cast their vote for such a dangerous precedent. Funny, I have not heard from them.Lastly, The President of the Dallas Fed Reserve, in a recent WSJ interview indicated their research showed that SS and Medicare alone has an unfunded present value liability of over $100 Trillion. And, both will be insolvent within a few years. That suggests our true national debt is over 10 times it publicized level. That means that if every bit of our citizen’s earnings for about the next 8 years were collected as taxes, it would still be short. It appears the country is headed for bankruptcy as we cannot inflate or tax our way out of this. Seems to me a criminal act on their part to not solve this first. The politicians have dug a deep hole for themselves and have put our progeny at great risk through their selfishness. They are the horse thieves of modern America!

Posted by Rick | Report as abusive
 

Dear LOL;What is a solution or do you just smack lips and be critical? This is not your breakfast table and you are not talking with your children. Get in with ideas or leave the table. You do not agree with Bruce in the very next comment? Bruce, you got it exactly…….Semper Fi

Posted by Mightycline | Report as abusive
 

Dear “LOL,Spoken like someone too ignorant to take off the rose colored glasses when looking at the “80s”. You think today is bad? You really want the 80s?? The interest rate on my first house – 15%. Top marginal rate? 78% Words like “stagnation”, “misery index” were the economic buzz words of the day. Know what got us there? Uncontrolled spending, high taxes and a Democrat party out of touch with the most basic understanding of economics. It took 4 years of carter to get us to 1980. Its taken 10 months of Obama to blow right past him. And the worst is net to come.Housing – foreclosures still at an all-time high. Commercial real-estate – just beginning to be noticed but with TRILLIONS in notes that will need to be renegotiated or foreclosed on. The Treasury purchasing a significant portion of our monthly bond auction. As the writer above stated – $100 TRILLION in unfunded obligations to SS, Medicare and Medicaid.We spent $1.4 TRILLION more that we took in this year – and the solution is to borrow more – so we can spend more – so we can tax more – so the market has LESS capital – so they can grow LESS – so they can hire FEWER – so the government can BORROW more – so they can spend more . . . . .Ah yes, that’ll work!

Posted by W. Keller | Report as abusive
 

Can someone else try this math? It was mentioned in the article that a 1% reduction in the average marginal rate in income tax can increase GDP by .6% . If you assume that the federal revenue is about 2.5 Trillion , tax revenue is about 47% of that, and GDP is approximately 14 Trillion : A reduction in taxes of $12 B can increase the GDP by $84 B . Sounds like a good trade off to me. Can someone back up my math/assumptions.Later

Posted by Jacob | Report as abusive
 

Hater!!!!You forgot to cite your GOP talking points. The guy YOU voted for got us into this mess so you are in NO position to instruct us on how to get out of Bush’s disasterous economy. You’re just scared that the Stimulus worked and Obama is going to be a successful president and people will realize that Republicans are TERRIBLE stewards of the economy and their policies are deleterious to american workers.

Posted by Linu | Report as abusive
 

numbers look good. It was just his theory, data would be another thing, however probably about right… govt is super inefficient and doing things that dont do much at all, so no suprise the country produces much more when the dead weight is least.BTW, with all this single payer talk, anyone every here any rational argument for it, like has anyone showed a supply-demand curve, and how it might make sense?

Posted by Distraught | Report as abusive
 

Lol,You must have been reading the “empirical” studies in some old Tass News Agency Pravda releases from behind the iron curtain in the 1960s.Tax cuts stimulate economic growth. It works every time it is tried. Economic growth lowers unemployment. Government can create work. Government can never create JOBS. So slashing the bloated federal budget sounds pretty good to me. I swear….you libs and your “reality” just wear me out.”It’s not that our liberal friends are ignorant. It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” ~ Ronald Reagan

Posted by PostModern | Report as abusive
 

James, please be careful with articles like this that question the “wisdom” of these policies. You are going to be “called out” by our administration. You are a liar, fear-monger, deceiver…that’s because you question the White House, not because of what you wrote. They will probably put an email snitch on you. Dissent is no form of patriotism around here.I keep thinking these economic policies are so puzzling and defy common sense so much that they must know (and condone, and have as an agenda) this economic destruction. The joke is on us, ha ha ha, yes we can, yes we can dismantle the country’s economy from inside. It seems implausible… Or maybe it is just massive vote buying with pork. Except the pig is getting skinnier and skinnier.

 

Obama’a idea of stimulus is this: take every known way to encourage wealth creation in a free market, then do the exact opposite.He has never been in the business world, so he can’t possibly know what to do. As a lawyer, he is trained to redistribute wealth, not create it, and his failed policies show it every day. When he does admit he needs help, he asks academics versed in economic theories instead of businessmen for real world advice. He thinks profits are evil, yet the money he makes from his books are perfectly wonderful.This guy and his Democrat cronies are doing their dead level best to destroy the American Dream. Is that what we elected them to do?

 

I have lived through the Carter years and saw my community absolutely devastated by the poplicies of his administration and the Democrat congress. I watched factory after factory close and purchased my first house at a 16.6% interest rate after a $10,000 up front buy down. The Reagan years of the eighties that lol mocks were welcome medicine after a very freightening period. People like our current President, Mr. Carter and I am sure lol, have loads of mighty theories gained from a life in academia, where they were probably brainwashed to some degree, but bring no real world experience to the table should be kept as far away from making policy as possible. I have no economics pedigree, but I have had several successful businesses. I do know this: Only the private sector can create capital. The public sector can only consume it or redistribuite it to others who lack the ambition to create their own.

Posted by heartlandman | Report as abusive
 

Liberals decrying tax cuts should check their logic. Take taxes to either extreme. Would there be commerce if there were no taxes? Absolutely. Would there be commerce at a 100% rate? No. Taxes are a detriment to commerce. It’s an economic fact. For every dollar taken from the economy as tax receipts, there is a negative multiplier (the amount is arguable) effect on the economy.If this were not true, why wouldn’t we tax at far higher rate?

Posted by Don | Report as abusive
 

I would generally agree with the comments of the writer, but he does say:”The administration didn’t count on the recession being far worse than it anticipated, driving the unemployment rate toward double digits.”this I would have to disagree with.Early on in Obama’s administration all we heard about was that “this recession was going to be another depression” or something close to the 1930s Great Depression.I don’t think this administration underestimated the severity of the recession. I think they just let greed and liberal political priorities get in the way of doing what’s right for the country.

Posted by Bill Sanford | Report as abusive
 

Hey, lol:Even JFK knew tax cuts spur more growth than ANY spending.In fact, JFK (fiscally) was more Conservative than 99% of Republicans.Just read the facts… not the cherry-picked ones and you will see what JFK knew. Yes, there was a time when Democrats were fiscally conservative. That was until they decided to buy everyone’s votes by giving away money.

Posted by Ster | Report as abusive
 

It’s foolish to think that something as large as the US economy can only have one way to fix it. Are some methods better than others? Sure. But the flat truth is that the economy will recover no matter what the government does. They could do nothing, and it would improve eventually. When it does, whoever is in charge will take complete credit and it will be cited as proof of whatever policy they had.I think the best solution would be to have tax cuts during slow times, and tax hikes during boom years. Bush’s tax cuts get thrown around alot, but it’s easy to see that they pushed the current crisis back a couple years. The merits of that are debatable (delaying it makes it worse).

 

I must be living in an alternative universe. First, just when did the new Obama administration underestimate the severity of “The Great Recession”? I beleive that was a phrase they coined. I also recall them constantly talking down the economy as the worst in the last 50 years during the campaign, after the election, and since the inauguration.Secondly, where are the tax cuts? Since the release of the 3rd quarter GDP results, I keep hearing how the tax cuts have helped. What tax cuts?! Whose got cut? How much got cut? And where the hey is mine?Finally, the challenge that Obama has in implementing his agenda has everything to do, ironically, with the amount of debt he racked up in record time. Between the $787B “stimulus” spending followed immediately by the $400B omnibus bill, he himself has said “we’re broke”.Obama emptied the treasury and has no money to pay for health care, cap-and-trade, et. al. The national debt is one of the arguments against health care. It is also one of the key instigators of the Tea Parties and his robust opposition.One can argue Obama’s self-inflicted debt has been his greatest enemy. “Fate, it seems, is not without a sense of irony.”

Posted by truzak | Report as abusive
 

I’m happy to see that so many people are waking up. Now everybody has to realize that there is no difference between the Republicans and the Demorcrats. They have both destroyed our economy. They are tyrants that are only accountable to there special interests. It’s time they are accountable to us. Hopefully the next two elections are a wake up call to both parties.

Posted by sloughrunner | Report as abusive
 

Obama is now claiming that the $787 billion stimulus program “created or saved 1 million jobs.”It amazes me that anyone would have the – dare I say audacity – that they would say such a thing and hope we believe it. But what’s even more perplexing is that anyone would be foolish enough to WANT to.Does anybody do long division anymore? $787 billion is the same as $787 thousand million. Even if you were to believe this fable, that would put the price tag for EACH of those “created or saved” jobs at $787,000.Now excuse me, but I thought the Median FAMILY income was only about $50,000. That being the case, we could have just given those same million individuals $50,000 apiece for a mere $50 billion. For the price of the stimulus package, we could have given them each $50,000 a year for almost 16 years.Instead we have created a debt that these people will be paying off in perpetuity – the ANNUAL interest expense at 4% being almost $32 billion which of course is $32,000 million – meaning for us to break even on this deal we need to be able to collect $32,000 in taxes annually on each of these million jobs we have “created or saved.”The very fact that the Obama administration would tout this as a positive demonstrates either how dumb they are, or how dumb they think we are. So which do you think it is?

Posted by George Hanshaw | Report as abusive
 

I think that Obama is his advisory staff and they are Obama. That is: his choices for advisors all seem to reflect the Alinsky socialist pacifist community organizer ACORN-SEIU union thug that the faux Messiah really is. It is not only his Cabinet, but those flaky czars. And where in the Constitution is the place where the Executive hires czars as extra-legal advisors? In fact, with all the take-overs by Obama of economic industries : where is the Constitution on that? And please all this baloney about no difference between the parties: sure the GOP spent too much under W but there are huge differences even if the GOP is often called The Stupid Party . And any 3rd Party will only get leftists elected ala Corzine in NJ and Owens in the NY23rd unless people realize in just 4 days that both the Pub-conserv candidates will be the ones to reform and kick out the big taxers and spenders. Wrapping this all up: and that is what the aides to Obama are and so is he. Witness the Cap and Tax and the monstrosity of the new Pelosicare bill.

 

“The administration didn’t count on the recession”. You can’t be serious, they said during the election that the economy was “the worst since the great depression”. They are just incompetent children playing at governing, please let’s elect some serious adults next time who understand how the economoy actually works. Tax cuts = more investment money = more money to loan businesses = more production = more jobs. It’s not that hard folks, but I guess it helps if you have actually worked a few jobs first so you understand where your pay check actuall comes from, its not the government.

Posted by Frank | Report as abusive
 

You Obama hacks just keep on believing don’t you? The stimulus clearly has not worked. The simple facts of economics tell us that giving money to financial institutions and funding pet political projects doesn’t create jobs. JFK cut taxes, LBJ cut taxes, Reagan cut taxes, Bush cut taxes…..and they all created jobs. Tax cuts never ALWAYS create jobs…period. Check your history please! Obama’s Marxist friends sold him on this mess and he’ll go down with it in 2012. You nit wits can count on losing at least 25-30 seats in 2010 as well. You’ll lose the house of reps in 2012. Everyone is on to “hope and change” as being a total sham.

 

“Secondly, where are the tax cuts? Since the release of the 3rd quarter GDP results, I keep hearing how the tax cuts have helped. What tax cuts?! Whose got cut? How much got cut? And where the hey is mine?”-truzakI believe it was in April, but Obama’s tax cut reduced the Federal Withholdings from your takehome pay. It translates into an extra $10-$20 a paycheck for most people. The idea was that a large cut like Bush’s would be saved or used to pay down debt, which wouldn’t stimulate the economy. This way, they hoped people would spend more without realizing it. I guess it worked on you. ;)It also means you can look forward to either a smaller tax refund next year, or still owing money next tax season.

 

More blame Bush. Nice.

Posted by Fred | Report as abusive
 

Obama could have taken the Reagan path to growth and jobs, but he doesn’t trust the working people of America. Instead he trusted the Government and Nancy Pelosi and gave us a trillion dollars in corrupt special interests payback spending. 9.8% UNEMPLOYMENT going to 15% is the result. Who now is more credible? Those who said the massive corrupt stimulous bill wouldn’t add any jobs or Obama who promised it would keep UNEMPLOYMENT below 8%? Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing. Its ok if he takes the Democrats down in 2010, but the rest of are going to be paying for a generation or more for Obama’s Chicago Way!

Posted by valwayne | Report as abusive
 

I lived through the Reagan years and saw his policies create monster-sized deficits that hurt my community for years and years. I lived through the George W Bush years which resulted in economic strife that is hurting my community still. Republicans: sit down, be quiet until you can match the prosperity and balanced budgets of the Clinton years. In fact, just shut up.

Posted by Mr. Smearcase | Report as abusive
 

Mr. Smearcase (nice name) said-I lived through the Reagan years and saw his policies create monster-sized deficits that hurt my community for years and years. I lived through the George W Bush years which resulted in economic strife that is hurting my community still. Republicans: sit down, be quiet until you can match the prosperity and balanced budgets of the Clinton years. In fact, just shut up.You must be referring to the balanced budget from the balanced budget law enacted by the Republican lead Congress begging with their sweep in 1994 and the prosperity that came from Newt Gingrich and his crowd’s “Contract with America” or it might be the prosperity gained from all the defense spending done by Reagan administration prior to Clinton that helped bring an end to the cold war and the peace dividend that Clinton was to enjoy? By the way, my community suffered miserably a lot of plant closures and job losses as many more will suffer the same under this president. How did your community suffer under Reagan and Bush? Loss of federal handouts?And no my friend, Republicans are not going to shut up. We have been too quiet for too long. That’s what allowed this insanity to take over our government. You folks have no idea what you have started.

Posted by heartlandman | Report as abusive
 

Just how bad will Democrat losses be next year? I’m thinking like a nuclear bomb. I think Team Obama Pelosi Reid, Inc., will have come close to destroying the modern Democratic Party and discredited liberalism for half a generation. Just casting an eye over the hysterical comments from the bitter-enders on the left suggests that to me. They can feel the reaper coming and are wetting their pants in fear.

Posted by Carl Pham | Report as abusive
 

Next Tuesday I will be 80 years of age. I survived LBJ, Jimma Carter and Bubba Clinton and I fully intend to survive Barock Obummer.Ronald Reagan had it right when he told the American people, “I am going to cut your taxes and turn you loose.” That is the best way to encourage economic growth. The problem with stimulus packages and the various other government schemes is that each program requires that at least 10,000 bureaucrats, that don’t know which end is up, be hired and that, my friends, is nothing but dead, unproductive weight on the economy.

Posted by Eglin | Report as abusive
 

“If you want to slash and burn the entire federal budget to stave off .5% unemployment…be my guest.”Slash and burn the entire federal budget? Sounds great! Where do I sign up?

Posted by Don't Tread on Me | Report as abusive
 

With the mob in Washington terrorizing small businesses and the high-income folks, I think unemployment is heading much higher since small businesses create close to 60% of all jobs. With socialized medicine, the promise of much higher taxes, cap & trade etc., a lot of people, including me, are packing it in and leaving the country to go shrugging. We simply don’t trust Obama, Nancy & Harry. If you look at the unemployment numbers over the past few month, small businesses layoffs are skyrocketing. Why bother having a business when there is little or no ROI?I’ve gone to two events outside the country in the past year that help businesses and entrepreneurs move from the USA and both sold out for the first time ever. While the mob in Washington is hell bent on punishing achievement, a bunch of other countries are rewarding it with very low taxes, low regulations, and other incentives. A lot of high income people are realizing the best opportunities are outside USA.I lived through Carter’s reign of terror. In those years, a lot of countries welcomed a lot of our businesses and they are gone for good. Now they aren’t only welcoming businesses, but entrepreneurs. And I think many are going to leave.The top 2% of income earners already pay around 60% of all income taxes in the US and that group is comprised of only 3 or 4 million people. That’s not a whole lot of people. And now the mob thinks they can stick us with yet more taxes. When a substantial number of us leave, there will be no job creation and tax revenues will plummet.I think the US is getting a very painful but necessary lesson in free market economics that may take years to learn. But the good thing is that people will have nobody to blame but the Democrats for the mess. I like what Reagan once said. “Socialism works in only two places – heaven and hell. And they don’t need it in heaven.”

Posted by GoingShrugging | Report as abusive
 

heartlandman, you list some good reason the Clinton era might’ve been booming, but I think you miss the real one: the internet.The 90s would’ve been a teriffic time economically no matter what party was in charge. A completely new industry sprang up almost overnight.

 

heartlandman and drewbie list some good reasons for the Clinton era boom.Reagan’s dissolution of the Soviet Union and the “peace dividend” and the Republican control of congress were extremely important economically.Technology studies have shown that it always takes twenty years for new technology to become significant. The most important technology of the century was the microprocessor, which was invented in 1972. Twenty years later, 1992, the economic effects of the microprocessor revolution drove the Clinton economy, with the Internet being only the most visible result.In short, Clinton would have had to work hard to suppress the economic boom of the 90′s.Unfortunately, there is no such rescue awaiting us, so we’ll have to be smart at a time when Obama’ites are incredibly stupid (due to complete absence of real world experience.)No matter what numbers you use for number of jobs divided into ‘stimulus’ dollars, the answer is an absurd cost per job. Wait til you see what health care will cost per life!We’ve got to take control soon, or these idiots will ruin us.

Posted by Gene Man | Report as abusive
 

The 200 pound gorilla in the room that nobody wants to talk about is uncertainty. As long as there are big uncertainties with health care, cap and trade and all other projects in the dream pipeline of the democratic congress, there would be no job recovery. Who will expand his business and hire new people if they do not know how much they it will cost benefits or energy next year or how much their taxe would be? With Reagan the economy grew while reducing taxes and with Clinton the economy grew while increasing taxes, so the important aspects is not if there are tax cuts or tax increases. The common aspect of both presidents was that markets felt they were reasonable and predictable people in Washington, so far markets are not feeling that there are reasonable or predictable people in charge, and this is why the job market is stagnant.

Posted by George | Report as abusive
 

The Obama “stimulus” spending bill was entirely a corrupt funneling of money to socialist causes. It was never intended as anything but graft. Government cannot create jobs,but government can certainly destroy jobs, as we saw with NAFTA. The cure for socialism is to keep as many Democrats as possible unemployed for as long as possible. If you value freedom, hold on to your money. Buy from craigslist or ebay and avoid taxes. Stop going out to eat, keep spending to survival levels. Naturally you will want to stay away from Hollywood movies, mainstream media,major network TV and MSNBC, CNN.

 

We have an illegitimate political system and an illegitimate government. The elite political class has set us on the path to slavery and there is no way out. The elites must be made to pay for their crimes. Revolution is the only solution.

 

Obama’s science advisor John Holdren is an anti-growth Green fanatic. He’s a Global Warming end-of-the-worlder like Al Gore.So it makes sense that Obama’s economic policies would be antithetical to economic growth.These guys really believe the leftist propaganda which is belched up during beer and bong parties at schools of “higher” learning. They really believe that free-market capitalism is oppressing the poor and destroying the environment. Never mind that advanced capitalist societies have been cleaning up their environmental act for years, and have been giving massive amounts of food and giving medicine to billions of poor people around the world for half a century.Yet Obama and his leftist cadre appear to want to destroy that which has brought more economic well-being and security to more people on planet earth than any other system ever devised.They must be stopped.We must start fighting back.

Posted by Parker1227 | Report as abusive
 

Stupid liberals STILL think that raising taxes during a recession is a good idea.

Posted by higgins1990 | Report as abusive
 

And we’re just supposed to trust these Government “reports”?How can they say we’re out of a recession when home foreclosures are surging still (see http://www.foreclosure.com) and auto repossessions are skyrocketing (see http://www.repofinder.com)?I’ll trust my magic 8 ball over Government “reports”.

Posted by mike | Report as abusive
 

Another Kudlow idiot-supply side has ruined this country

Posted by paul nelson | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •