Obama’s budget would explode the national debt while increasing taxes. That’s the conclusion of the Congressional Budget Office, controlled by lawmakers who support Obama. “The President’s proposals would add $4.8 trillion to the national debt,” increasing “the cumulative deficit from 2010 to 2019 to $9.3 trillion.” The budget also adds $1.9 trillion in tax increases.
And the stimulus bill Obama claimed was needed to avert “disaster” and “irreversible decline“? It will shrink the economy over the long run, since its “increase in government debt is expected to displace or ‘crowd out’ . . . private capital.”
Obama yesterday praised the House for passing a bonus tax that would make some employees of healthy banks pay over 100 percent in taxes and legal obligations. (The administration is lying about when it became aware of the AIG bonuses, which it knew about for months, and shielded through language it slipped into the stimulus package to benefit AIG, which is a major donor to liberal politicians like Obama)
The CBO’s conclusion confirms its earlier findings that the stimulus package will cut wages and the size of the economy in the long run, despite costing $800 billion. The stimulus package also gutted welfare reform.
Despite Obama’s praise for the economically-destructive bonus-tax bill, his language was so vague and weaselly that both proponents and opponents of the bill, in wishful thinking, expressed the belief that he agreed with them. Supporters of the bill took his praise at face value; opponents thought his remarks were simply catering to public outrage, which has led to “threats of violence” against AIG employees. Public outrage over AIG may have peaked, judging by blog comment threads.
Loading ...
The style of writing is quite familiar . Have you written guest posts for other blogs?
You’re right — except it was FDR who raised the taxes to our their highest levels, not Hoover. And, it wasn’t 63%, but 94%. (See truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php)
It’s one of those things that gets repeated over and over and then becomes “true”. FDR, of course, is the person who Democrats have elevated to near saint-hood, and who Obama wants to emulate.
But get this. After 7 **years!** into the Depression, and after multiple over-the-top spending and stimulus efforts (sound familiar?), FDR’s own economic team decided that the “just do something, even if it’s wrong” approach, also known as “tax and spend”, wouldn’t and couldn’t work. And it didn’t. The Depression went on for another 6 years.
But, even so, FDR had enough charisma to get elected to two more terms (before term limits, of course), but yes, two more terms!!!
I pray that we’re smarter in 2012, but with the media still promoting him like a rock star and virtually no one with a media badge wanting to offend His Majesty by asking tough, two-part questions, for fear that they’ll get thrown out of the groupie/media posse, it will be tough for folks to hold Obama responsible for the additional $9 trillion debt (plus whatever is added the next four years).
In fact, many people still think he’s REDUCING THE DEBT, because of his claim that he will cut the (annual) DEFICIT (not the DEBT) “in half in four years”. People hear carefully scripted (and unchallenged) sound bites, and get confused and misled.
Of course, that yearly deficit is based upon his own record over-spending of 2009. So if he can add $9.3 trillion this year, and unknown trillions in 2010 and 2011, he would ONLY (LOL!) add $4.7 trillion in 2012! Wow! See what I mean about having charisma? He’s adding to our grandchildren and great-grandchildrens’ debt, and people think he’s reducing it!
It’s like those frogs who get cooked but don’t realize it because the temperature is gradually increased. We get debt out the wazoo, and are approaching national bankruptcy, but since he sounds so suave and confident, people think he’s actually helping, because they choose not to look at the details.