Backup

[idesign]

I've posted twice lately in

the Stimulus Plan thread but can't view the page 3 where they should be. Posted this here until I figure out why.

OTOH, maybe this is a hint that I should shut up?


I've been thinking about the whole issue of ideology v.

economics, and thinking about how much I hated the knee-jerk-Bush-bashing that went on ad nauseum.

I honestly

don't know how to separate dislike of Obama's policies from his political/ideological foundation. I guess Doc is

right.

I'd be willing to cut this guy a break if he piddled around like most new Presidents with this and that

aspect of the same old scene. Unfortunately its not so simple right now. The economy is pretty much a mess, with

plenty of blame to go around, in the public as well as private sector.

I'm as much frustrated with the

Congress as I am with Obama, perhaps more so. They were directly involved with the crash of Freddie and Fannie and

did nothing but cover their asses when the bubble popped. As well, they freakin voted for a bill that allowed AIG

bonuses (see Dodd amendment) then showed themselves as very poor actors when the public became outraged, and they

had to follow suit. Some leadership.

And that brings me to part of the problem with Obama; he's no leader.

He's following a formula that's been devised and refined over decades. Confiscatory taxation and public spending

is much more than the transfer of wealth. Its the transfer of power. We're seeing it in spades now. The gov't

has assumed ownership of private enterprise and intends to exert every bit of control over those assets it can.

Just look at the outrageous proposal to tax the AIG bonuses after the fact. Not only is it blatantly

unconstitutional, but its downright frightening to any believer in private ownership.

The shift from a

Republican (in the larger sense) form of gov't to a Liberal "caretaker" gov't has, up to this point, been mostly

gradual. FDR rocked the whole system and started it all, and LBJ pumped it up quite a bit, and there have been

those who checked this trend, like Eisenhower and Reagan. What Obama is proposing to do is complete the shift in

one radical move.

His massive spending, the massive printing of new money, the massive transfer of wealth to the

Federal gov't, the massive increase in debt, all amount to transfer of power. Our economy is resilient, but who

knows how it can bear up under such libertine recklessness.

Part of the scary scenario is the US economy, and

the dollar, on the world stage. Obama is rapidly in danger of becoming a laughing-stock. The EU is complaining

vehemently, China is offering unsolicited economic advice and Americans are slowly waking up to this

reality.

Have you heard about the TEA parties that are springing up? TEA = Taxed Enough Already. One group has

organized 250 of these, and some are drawing as many as 4,000 people. Of course taxation is only a scratch on the

surface

[Mtnjim]

Guess I'll stick my post here

until the forum gets

fixed.


Fiscal Stimulus/Economic Analysis (http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/03/07/did-new-deal-end-depression-history-says-deficit-sp

ending-works/): The New Deal increased U.S. GDP and resulted in a

substantial decrease in U.S. unemployment, both during its initial phase (1933-37) and after FDR turned back 1937-38

Republican pressure to balance the budget (1939-41). The fiscal stimulus provided by the New Deal worked. That's

the record, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
If anything, FDR's New Deal spending was too small in

the early years: had a larger stimulus been passed, U.S. GDP would have increased more and unemployment would

have declined to lower levels.

[belgareth]

That's according to that

analysis, which may or may not be correct. And since then the country has steadily increased taxes, the deficit

grown and the overall burden of excessive government grown while core values continued to drop, the family

deteriorated, it became more and more a requirement for both the husband and wife to work in order to survive. I

differentiate between both partners wanting an career and it being a necessity, which in most of middle class

America, it is.

[belgareth]

Personally, I believe this point of view to be far more rational and sustainable in the long term than

Obama's:

GOP says Obama

budget threatens future prosperity




By WILL LESTER,

Associated Press Writer Will Lester, Associated Press Writer



WASHINGTON – Attacking President Barack Obama's grand spending plans,

a GOP lawmaker who almost joined the Democrat's Cabinet said Saturday the U.S. must live within its means or risk

its tradition of passing a more prosperous country from one generation to the next.

"We believe you create prosperity by having an

affordable government that pursues its responsibilities without excessive costs, taxes or debt," Sen. Judd Gregg

said in the Republican radio and Internet address.



Gregg, who accepted the job as commerce secretary but then withdrew

his nomination because of "irresolvable conflicts" with Obama's policies, has become one of the toughest critics of

Obama's handling of the economy.

"In the next five years, President Obama's budget will double the national debt. In the next 10 years, it

will triple the national debt," said Gregg, R-N.H.



"His budget assumes the deficit will average $1 trillion every year

for the next 10 years and will add well over $9 trillion in new debts to our children's backs," said Gregg, the top

Republican on the Senate Budget Committee. "He also is proposing the largest tax increase in history, much of it

aimed at taxing small business people who have been, over the years, the best job creators in our

economy."

Gregg said

Obama's proposals "represent an extraordinary move of our government to the left."

He acknowledged that Obama "is very forthright in

stating that he believes that by greatly expanding the spending, the taxing and the borrowing of our government,

this will lead us to prosperity."

In seeking to make the GOP case, Gregg said:



_"It is the individual American who creates prosperity and good jobs,

not the government."

_"We believe that you create energy independence not by sticking Americans with a brand new national sales tax

on everyone's electric bill, but by expanding the production of American energy ... while also conserving

more."

_"We also believe

you improve everyone's health care not by nationalizing the health care system and putting the government between

you and your doctor, but by assuring that every American has access to quality health insurance and choices in

health care."

He said the

U.S. "has an exceptional history of one generation passing on to the next generation a more prosperous and stronger

country, but that tradition is being put at risk."