In what year, exactly, does Barack Obama become responsible for all the things that got worse since Bush left office, things like lower median income, lower household income, greater national debt, higher unemployment, a greater percentage of people on food stamps, a greater share of persons in poverty, higher food prices, higher gas prices, the failure to pass even one budget in four years, an unguarded consulate in Libya on the anniversary of 9/11, and the Middle East in flames? When?
It’s funny how the new Republican governors in several states, governors who have been in office far less time than Obama, were able to turn their states around, despite having to operate in the midst of a faltering national economy made worse by Obama’s policies from Washington. QE1 and QE2 failed, and now QE3 is following in their train. If insanity is trying the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, then his economic policies are insane.
I’ve heard him say many times that it’s not his fault because he inherited a mess. If he gets re-elected, the mess he inherits from himself will be enormously greater than the one he got from Bush. If he failed to fix the smaller mess, he'll fail to fix the larger one simply by re-applying the same tired Keynesian nonsense.
The bottom line: He promised. He promised, for example, to cut the national debt in half. He failed. Instead of cutting the national debt by 5 trillion dollars, he increased it by 6 trillion. No other politician in the history of the world has ever miscalculated by 11 trillion dollars in four years. If he failed because he knowingly made promises he couldn’t keep, then he’s a liar. If he failed because he made promises he didn’t know he couldn’t keep, then he’s incompetent. Either way, liar or incompetent, he doesn’t deserve re-election.
3 comments:
Well said.
But hope springs eternal with the statist crowd.
No doubt they they think that continued deficit spending, combined with tax hikes on the rich, will cure everything in Obama's second term.
Maybe there's a silver lining here, though. At some point, the economy's continuing misery should put another nail in the coffin of Keynesian theory.
Relatedly, France just announced there is to be a new 75% tax rate for people earning more than 1m euros (£800,000; $1.3m) a year. No doubt, Obama and the rest of the progressive wing wish they could implement the same here in the United States.
I just hope they pay close attention to see how well it's going to work out for France.
What leftists seem to consistently forget is that people respond to incentives. As Thomas Sowell said in a recent column, "Those who talk glibly about redistribution often act as if people are just inert objects that can be placed here and there, like pieces on a chess board, to carry out some grand design. But if human beings have their own responses to government policies, then we cannot blithely assume that government policies will have the effect intended."
Maybe the real world results of France and the USA will be the death knell of progressive economics.
Well said, and spot on. I agree with you that, if we are patient and persistent, reality is on our side. Reality is resilient, and it might, eventually, have its way with them. Like you, I hope so.
Sowell, as usual, is right. Wen you don't treat people as people, your plans are doomed. Leftists are not good at seeing individuals. They see classes instead. They also forget that without work there's no success, and that without incentive there's no work.
Best to you. Put in a comment here whenever you like.
You waaacist! you! ;)
Post a Comment