Posted 5 months, 26 days ago in 
Loading ...
“Lefty Lite” appeared in a recent column by Rick Wagner to describe those in the Republican Party who he thinks are not conservative enough. That is not the way to attract the many voters who agree with us on preserving free markets and having a strong national defense.
We need to determine what we can agree on and focus on those principles. On economic issues, we have to underscore the damage to our country that will result from the tax-and-spend policies of the Obama administration. We need to hammer the facts home.
President Obama doesn’t spend, he only invests, but that will result in a $1.8 trillion deficit this year. His plan for cap and trade is estimated will cost a family $3,000 per year, according to MIT. What happened to taxing only the rich?
Once voters figure out spreading the wealth means their wealth too, they won’t be happy. This should be dawning on folks by the mid-term elections in 2010. It should be easy for Republicans to take up their cause. The party needs to focus to broaden its appeal. In 2010 it will be all about your wallet.
President Clinton said in his first campaign, “It’s about the economy stupid.” I suggest the Republicans copy a current credit card TV commercial by using, “What’s in your wallet?”
Dave Kearsley
Mesa
22 Responses to “GOP must focus on the economy”
Posted May 28th, 2009 at 7:04 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bill Clinton, as par of “it’s the economy stupid” slogan, decided he would do nothing that would hurt the bond market. He knew that rising interest rates would harm the economy. Barak Obama would do well to do the same. If he did, he would notice that long-term rates on US Treasury bonds are rising, and rising fast. Why? Because bond market investors see the trillions of dollars that the Treasury is having to issue to finance the deficit. And those trillios continue well after next year.
What will be the result of these high deficits?
1. Interest rates will rise. That will put another whammy on the housing market as mortgage rates rise.
2. The U.S. dollar will continue to fall. That will lead to inflation.
3. The economy will remain subdued and unemployment rates will remain high.
The president acknowledges that the projected deficits are a big problem. But he does not acknowledge that HE is the primary cause of the long-term deficits that are forecast for the next 10 years and beyond.
So what will he do about it? There is zero chance that he will cut government spending. There is a 100% chance that he will raise taxes. And he will raise them A LOT. And not just on the rich. Not only are we looking at increases in income taxes, but the talk now is of a 10% VAT tax and who knows what else.
And what will be the result of this big increase in taxes?
An even worse economy.
This president is putting the country into a noose from which it will be very difficult to escape.
Republicans need to find someone who can clearly delineate these issues to the citizens of our country and explain to them where Obama’s policies will lead.
Posted May 28th, 2009 at 8:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
How about you, bullish?
Posted May 29th, 2009 at 7:01 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Duke, I am much too honest, not sufficiently dimplomatic, nor sufficiently able to hold my cool, to be a politician. More importantly, having been born in Cuba, I am automatically disqualified to be your president.
Posted May 29th, 2009 at 7:16 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, first, even though it is typical, you don’t necessarily have to be President to delineate issues and explain policy. You do a much better job than any Republicans I know. Most of them are too busy crying “socialism” and “racist” and “faschist” at every turn. President Obama has shown (I hope it should be clear by now), that he is willing to challenge liberals as well as conservatives in order to get it right. He is willing to learn and make good decisions based on new information.
Why couldn’t the guy who turns the party around be “Bullish , the blogger” instead of “Joe, the plumber.” ( Except you really are )
Someone in the Republican Party needs to step up and say, enough of this foolishness, let’s get to work. If you’re that dude, you have my vote.
Posted May 29th, 2009 at 7:40 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Duke, I am not interested in running for political office. I have never been invoilved in campaigning for candidates I support. But, I may very well do so in the future. I considered campaigning for McCain but, frankly, he was not my ideal candidate.
I think it is very important for republicans to understand the difference between liberalism and socialism. While socialism incorporates most liberal principles, it goes further by having the government take over the country’s means of production. Since socialism has seldom ever worked, there is one further step, communism, where those who believe in socialism force it upon an unwilling population by establishing a dictatorship. That is what you have in Cuba and a few other places.
Mr. Obama may be a socialist at heart, but we don’t know that. He is certainly the most liberal politician this country has ever elected president and he arrived in office at both a good time, and a bad time, to impose a liberal agenda.
It is a good time because the Congress is the most liberal it has ever been and will pass most of his agenda.
It is a bad time because the country is in a financial mess, immersed in one of the worst recessions in its history, and producing federal deficits which were already too large even before the big liberal government programs, requiring big government spending, were even proposed.
Basically, the president is looking to spend an obscene amount of money we don’t have. Raising that money, either through borrowing, or by printing it, or by big time taxes, will have dire long-term consequences. In the end, the programs themselves, after they are implemented, will have to be cut back for lack of sufficient funds.
But what else could he do? As a liberal, he feels he has to do what he promised. Otherwise he cannot be re-elected.
It is up to Republicans to make sure he is not re-elected and do whatever possible to undo the damage he is about to create. My fear is that once you install a humongous government welfare program, like universal health care, it will be nearly impossible to undo.
Posted May 29th, 2009 at 7:52 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
“As a liberal, he feels he has to do what he promised. Otherwise he cannot be re-elected.”
He may also believe that his plan will work. He needs the help of the “loyal opposition”, not the invective.
Sorry, bullish, gotta go.
later.
Posted May 29th, 2009 at 8:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Duke, I don’t see any evidence that he knows whether his plan will work (and by work I mean that it will avoid huge economy busting deficits). He has admitted, on more than one occasion, that he believes the projected deficits are not acceptable. But he has yet to offer a solution.
His talk of reducing the deficts by half is a bit disingenuous. Even under the overly optimistic economic assumptions embodied in his deficit estimates, the deficit drops from $1.845 TRILLION in fiscal year 2009 to $658 Billion in fiscal year 2012 before starting to rise again and reaching $1.189 TRILLION by 2019. The ballooning debt will raise the annual interest on the debt from $170 Billion in fiscal 2009 to $806 BILLION in 2019. Imagine that! Just the annual interest on the debt will be moving close to a TRILLION a year by the end of the ten year period.
So, basically is spending the money first, and then looking for a miracle.
This is a disaster in the making. All the dire consequences of deficits, and their consequences, that we have heard for the last 30 years, have not materialized. But the deficits we are seeing today, and predicting for the future, are so much larger, that those consequences will absolutely be experienced.
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 8:37 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mr. Kearsley conveniently ignores the “borrow and spend” activity that has driven the so-called “conservative” agenda for the last thirty years. That promoted mentality, where deficits don’t really matter, was adopted by a large part of the population. As a consequence, the so-called prosperity was largely an illusion, both at the personal, organizational and national level. Such is what happens when we allow ourselves to be deluded into believing that “there is not cost” and “we can have it all.”
What Mr. Kearsley and others want us to forget is that they are the very ones who supported the policies of the previous administration and its sycophants in the Congress and Senate that have led us into the financial and economic quagmires in which we now find ourselves. When a member of a group supports its objectives and policies, the individual is also responsible for the results. To deny that fact is to be intellectually dishonest and/or hypocritical. But, that is history, to be recalled but not lived in.
As to national defense and security, Mr. Kearsley might wish to consider that national security policy, and thereby the security of the country, rests upon an intelligent foreign policy, one based upon reality, pragmatism and not only physical force. We now see the results of the false bravado and machismo of the previous administration, where we ended up alienating a large part, if not most of the world. However, if Mr. Kearsley wishes to protract the use of “fear” to control the political process in this country, that is his choice. Some of us are intelligent enough to recognize the self-serving nature of that ruse.
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 11:52 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL: “Mr. Kearsley conveniently ignores the “borrow and spend” activity that has driven the so-called “conservative” agenda for the last thirty years. That promoted mentality, where deficits don’t really matter, was adopted by a large part of the population.”
And now, not only has it been adopted by this president, but when it comes to deficit spending, no one in the history of this great country has even come close to what he is going to accomplish. With trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, with interest on the debt alone rising to a trillion dollars a year ten years from now, this president will put a yoke around this economy’s neck that will last long after he goes back to Chicago.
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 12:44 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog: “With trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see, with interest on the debt alone rising to a trillion dollars a year ten years from now, this president will put a yoke around this economy’s neck that will last long after he goes back to Chicago.”
The “yoke” has already been placed around this nation’s neck. Those who placed it there are those who promoted the philosophy of “borrow and spend” where even “fighting wars” was to be done on credit. And that was not done by the current president or even this Congress and Senate. It was done by the previous administration and the sycophant Congress and Senate that were in power for the first six (6)years of that “reign.” Now that that mentality has been accepted by many individuals, it will be extremely difficult for people to change their minds. They have become used to it. Well, the bill has come due. Let us see if those who participated in this sham prosperity can now admit that they were wrong and begin cleaning up the mess they are largely responsible for creating or, if they just want to keep doing what they have, letting others pick up after them once again.
The reaction of the so-called “conservatives” I happen to find ridiculous as they are engaged in a wholesale campaign of “more of the same.” And, if it didn’t work, it is because “Our theories were not applied in pure enough forms. The “liberals” didn’t allow us to do it. So, the mess is now their fault.”
Their reactionary response was best described by the historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. in his Foreword to the Mariner Edition of the classic study of FDR, Volume 1, The Crisis of the Old Order”. “Reform always provokes rage on the part of those who profit by the old order.”
Those serious about seeking and understanding what is currently happening should study not only that volume, but the subsequent ones The Coming of the New Deal, and The Politics of Upheavel. In addition, they might care to obtain a copy of, and study another classing on the Great Crash written by John Kenneth Galbraith, The Great Crash.
Those who do not care to do so (their choice) can, if they wish, continue deluding themselves that the morass we now find ourselves in are totally new and different and so are its causes. This leads nowhere, but they are certainly free to do so.
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 12:56 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
rl-”The “yoke” has already been placed around this nation’s neck. Those who placed it there are those who promoted the philosophy of “borrow and spend” where even “fighting wars” was to be done on credit. And that was not done by the current president or even this Congress and Senate. It was done by the previous administration and the sycophant Congress and Senate that were in power for the first six (6)years of that “reign.”
incorrect, rl…the issues with the economy started well before either bush, reagan, or any other recent president regardless of party affiliation…the taxation policies that the bammer is instituting are only going to make things worse…while we desperately need to pay close attention to history and the cause and effects of major governmental policy changes, we really need to find a way out of the morass in which we find ourselves, if any exist
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 2:04 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL: “The “yoke” has already been placed around this nation’s neck. Those who placed it there are those who promoted the philosophy of “borrow and spend” where even “fighting wars” was to be done on credit. And that was not done by the current president or even this Congress and Senate. It was done by the previous administration and the sycophant Congress and Senate that were in power for the first six (6)years of that “reign.””
RL, I will respond in a diplomatic way because I am willing to engage you in a discussion without throwing spears.
The highest annual deficit in the history of this nation was in fiscal 2008 at $459 billion. The deficit for the current fiscal year is projected at $1.845 billion. For the sake of argument, I will not count this against Obama because much of this deficit, rightly or wrongly, is caused by spending aimed at stimulus. I could debate how much of this spending is true stimulus or not, but I won’t because that is not the source of my concern.
My concern is what happens starting in 2010. The Congressional Budget office, a non-partisan group, provides a baseline budget projection which shows what would happen to the federal budget if no policy changes were made over the projection period. That baseline shows a budget deficit, from 2010 through 2019, of $4.41 trillion. The Obama budget, with its new spending programs, shows a budget defict over the same timeline of $9.270 trillion.
To make matters worse, the Obama budget deficit, which drop from $1.139 trillion in 2010 to $785 billion in 2015, begin rising again in 2016 reaching $1.189 trillion in 2019.
You can keep talking about the past. I am concerned about the future. The president acknowledges, even if you won’t, that these deficits will kill the economy.
Posted June 1st, 2009 at 2:05 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Correction. The deficit for the current fiscal year is projected at $1.845 TRILLION, not billion.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 8:38 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’s touigh, isn’t it RL?
Philosophizing, psychoanalyzing, giving lip service to the party line, are easy for you.
But when challenged to engage in a factual discussion, you run.
Same old story.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 8:52 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
“what would happen to the federal budget if no policy changes were made over the projection period.”
Do you expect there to be no policy changes to help deal with the situation? What policy changes would you recommend?
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 9:33 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Duke, the point is that the policy changes (i.e. new spending programs) in Obama’s budget INCREASE government spending over the baseline budget by an amount that leads to an increase in the budget deficit from $4.41 trillion to $9.27 trillion over a ten year period and those deficits end the period rising at a rate in excess of $1 trillion a year.
“Do you expect there to be no policy changes to help deal with the situation? What policy changes would you recommend?”
I assume you are asking me what policy changes I would recommend to deal with the projected increase in the deficit that Obama has created.
My answer is that I would never have agreed to the spending proposals that created this obscene deficit. I would have demanded that if the president wanted to increase spending by such a significant amount that he also show how he was going to pay for it. And I would make approval of such spending contingent on approval of the funding. The Congress would then be forced to handle both sides at the same time.
Instead we get the spending approval first, the huge deficit projections, and a president who talks about how the size of the deficit, which he himself created, is unacceptable.
I have a pretty good idea of what is coming next. The president will tell the country how these deficits will kill the economy and he will then propose our salvation. And that salvation will be the biggest tax increase in the history of the universe.
And those tax increases will put a headwind on the economy which will condemn it to long-term weak growth and high unemployment.
Once these spending programs are in place, the economy will be in a noose from which it will be hard to escape.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 10:08 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
“which he himself created,”
Well, he didn’t do it single-handedly. There are many who agree with Obama that this path was necessary (and, like you, many who don’t), but I still believe that he is sincere and will find a way to fix the mess handed to him.
You may be right about the raising of taxes. I know it gives you the heebie-jeebies, but I think a little more time needs to pass before we will get a clear picture of where we stand. It is a very important issue, to be sure, but I still have confidence in our president and the government he is creating.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Duke, he is a very smart politician. I believe the reason he is getting his spending in first, and worrying about funding later, is because he knows that if the American people understood what all his goodies are going to cost them, they would not be so quick to agree.
Unfortunately, Republicans are not doing their job in pressing the issue and getting the folks to understand where we are headed.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 4:45 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Not one person in this forum has even made an attempt at answering the central question of the disscusion; what policy changes are needed to deal with the massive budget deficits? I suggest that is because none of you have the answers. Please prove me wrong and provide specific spending cuts and specific non-tax sources of revenue.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 5:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
i’ll bite, kemo…first thing is, bring back manufacturing…offer a 1-3 year corporate tax holiday on funds invested in work and research here in the U.S. providing jobs and benefits…equalize tarriffs for fair trade with our allies…if they charge us, we do the same…not protectionist, just how it should work…quit throwing good money after bad by bailing out large corporations and allow the free market to correct itself as it will if allowed…allow states the freedom to choose their own paths.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 5:36 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Kemo,
We could eliminate an enormous part of our “defense” budget by leaving the 130+ countries that we are currently occupying. We could eliminate non-disaster related funds in the farm bill (pretty much the entire farm bill is non-immergency so it could be eliminated) We could eliminate a large part of the department of education’s budget by replacing centralized administration with local, in school administration. We could eliminate government funding and control of medicine. This would force prices down as providers search for alternative sources of funding. Obviously, we could stop bailing out bankrupt institutions. This would cause overall prices to drop dramatically, bringing affordability to all segments of society. Also, allowing bankruptcy reorganization would restart the economy on a solid foundation with far greater confidence in the status of the institutions in question.
Posted June 2nd, 2009 at 5:48 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
kmeo: “Not one person in this forum has even made an attempt at answering the central question of the disscusion; what policy changes are needed to deal with the massive budget deficits? I suggest that is because none of you have the answers. Please prove me wrong and provide specific spending cuts and specific non-tax sources of revenue.”
LOL.
Kemo, the policy changes that cause the projected deficit to skyrocket are the policies being proposed by Obama and the Pelosi Congress. And it is those two who are now telling us that they are going to bring the deficit down. That two faced approach may be swallowed by the clueless, but most will find out the truth.
The david cox approach of cutting spending has a snowball’s chance in hell. We all know that the government will never cut spending. What this liberal government will do is propose taxes, taxes, taxes, and more taxes. And all those taxes will put an unbearable burden on the economy for many years to come.
What needs to happen is for the public to rise and tell the liberals that we will not accept their huge obscene increase in spending programs without showing how they are going to pay for them. But what this government is doing instead is spending the money they don’t have first, and then telling us they will not accept the deficit. It is a whole big pile of B.S.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.