Don’t Believe Me? Listen to the Democrats








Despite Paul Krugman’s assurances that there is no such thing as inflation, despite Christina Roemer’s predictions that a V-shaped recovery is not that hard to believe, and despite Barack Obama’s insistence that there are “green shoots” in the economy, I have long maintained that our economy is in big trouble if Spend Big policies continue unchecked.

When conservative congressional leaders talk about how runaway spending will damage the economy, lefties across the country roll their eyes. However, ignoring the gravity of the situation doesn’t make the truth any less of a reality. If you are one who can’t bring yourself to listen to an amateur conservative blogger, or a select few of the congressional conservative representatives, maybe you’ll be willing to hear it from a Democrat.

I came across an article by Dr. Charles Wheelan, a.k.a. the Naked Economist. I’ve been a long time reader of his; his articles often grace the pages of Yahoo! Finance. Though I’ve had my disputes, I’ve always appreciated his irreverent approach toward economics. Dr. Wheelan is not just a finance writer; he recently ran to replace Rahm Emanuel’s seat in Congress...and lost. Now, don’t take this post as an endorsement of Wheelan’s political views, I haven’t looked into them. I simply felt like his article was making sense, although I'm sure his ideas of raising taxes drastically differ from my own. So, without further ado, here is some common sense from one of the Democrats’ own.

“We need to stop bickering about who got us here. Was it the Bush tax cuts (yes) or the Obama stimulus (yes) or profligate Congressional spending (yes) or voters who continually reward pork more than parsimony (yes)? But analyzing just overcomplicates things. We are deeply in debt because we have routinely spent more than we collect in taxes. That's just a mathematical reality that has become needlessly confounded with politics.”


I’ve been trying to make this point since February! Wheelan points out that it is ridiculous for either side to bicker whose fault our deficit’s woes belong to (it's Obama's if you were wondering ;). It is a simple fact that we are here and we need to do something about it- a fact that hasn’t sunk in with the Obama administration’s agenda of “Spend Big.”

“Chinese officials aren't worried about bankruptcy because the U.S. has an easier and more insidious option -- we can print our way out of the problem. Our debt is denominated in dollars, and the U.S. government has the authority to print those dollars. We could take a page from the Zimbabwe policy manual and just print money to pay our bills -- thereby debasing the currency, creating inflation, and devaluing the real value of what we owe.

Is that a sensible solution? No, as it imposes the costs of inflation on all of us. I don't know anyone eager to revisit the 1970s (in terms of economic performance or fashion).”


I might add that printing money is Obama’s solution at the moment. Wheelan points out that there are very real repercussions to Obama’s twelve trillion dollar budget. Namely, 1970s-style inflation (which I’ll remind you Paul Krugman thinks is a myth).

“The solution to all this is straightforward: Spend less than we take in, and use the surplus to pay down debt. At the risk of lapsing into economics jargon, yes, this is going to suck. Think about it: Americans don't like their current tax bills -- which aren't even high enough to pay for our current spending, let alone the bills we've run up from the past. In the future, we will have to pay more and get less.

But we've done it before. We paid off the debt accumulated during World War II. In fact, the ensuing decades saw some of the most impressive gains in wealth and productivity in American history. But it will require a radical change from what we're doing now…

…Will that dampen economic growth in the short run? Yes. Will it jeopardize important social programs? Yes. Will it compromise our ability to make important public investments? Yes. Does it limit what we can spend on healthcare reform? Yes.”


I’d like to some up Wheelan’s conclusion by addressing what the Obama administration should have done day one in office. Enact a stimulus plan with the biggest bang for the smallest cost. Then go line by line, like was promised by Obama and cut. Instead, we enacted a liberal wish list of programs, hoping the sheer magnitude would shock the economy back to life. We got pay-go promises twice, so long as it doesn't apply to executive or congressional spending. This attitude sending global investors away in droves. We bet big on bad odds; it's not too late to call off the bet.

Wheelan wasn’t the only Democrat seriously talking fiscal reality today. Roger Altman and former deputy secretary to Clinton had this to say today in the Wall Street Journal:

“Yes, the President's Council of Economic Advisors is still forecasting a traditional cyclical recovery -- i.e., real growth of 3.2% next year and 4% in 2011. But the latest data suggests that we're on a much slower path. Probably along the lines of the most recent Goldman Sachs and International Monetary Fund forecasts, whose growth rates average about 2% for 2010-2011…

…The problem is the deficit's sheer size, which goes way beyond potential savings from cuts in discretionary spending or defense. It's entirely possible that Medicare and Social Security will already have been addressed, and thus taken off the table. In short we'll have to raise taxes….

… We all know the recent and bitter history of tax struggles in Washington, let alone Mr. Obama's pledge to exempt those earning less than $250,000 from higher income taxes. This suggests that, possibly next year, Congress will seriously consider a value-added tax (VAT). A bipartisan deficit reduction commission, structured like the one on Social Security headed by Alan Greenspan in 1982, may be necessary to create sufficient support for a VAT or other new taxes…"

Tea Party naysayers I hope you are reading! All those crazy hicks protesting taxes, how silly did you think they were when they were really getting $13/month from Obama? Perhaps those bitter clingers saw something you yourself were blind to see.



I’ve posted the graph above in a previous post to show the price tag on Obama’s Spend and Tax policies. The littlest bar is Obama’s proposed tax on the rich. There are many that believe Barack Obama is the Messiah; however, I seriously doubt he’ll be able to work a Loaves and Fishes miracle on his puny tax revenue model. You see, there is a bar that is missing from the graph and it is the future legislation of Barak Obama to make tax revenues as big and gaudy as the gigantic spending bar. Obama’s budget is $4 trillion and we are getting $2 trillion in tax revenues. Logically, to meet Obama’s whims we need to double taxes. I mean double all taxes…double everyone’s income taxes; everyone’s gas taxes; everyone’s social security taxes; everyone’s medicaide/medicare taxes; everyone’s corporate taxes; everyone’s excise taxes.

The only thing missing from the mouths of Wheelan and Altman is yet another startling but true reality. The only thing going for Barack Obama’s economy for the last few months is perception- confidence from the consumers and investors that the economy would be turning around. According to new numbers, consumer confidence has dropped unexpectedly. The last hinge of Obama’s “green shoots” is breaking.

So, for those of you still following the cap and trade, government health care Obama parade- my only words are: the clock is ticking.
Readers, visit and support the New Conservative Generation blog, especially check out his recent post on CO2 vs Solar Activity.

15 comments:

  1. As a mathematician and having studied basic enomonics, I never understood the belief of spending out of debt. The theory is that it will stimulate more back in taxes that will pay back the debt. The only thing is taxes SLOW down the economy, not stimulate it. And giving the money to parasites that give nothing in return, major blunder.

    I remember the inflation of the 70's and it was ugly, not a myth. The thing is with the outstanding debt we have now, which is astronomical compared to the 70's when we were a creditor nation, and the money that BO is printing, will make the 70's seem like an economic boom in comparison. This whole situation reminds me what one conservative economy historian told me. Printing of money doesn't cause inflation. Corrupt governments are the cause of inflation. Brace yourself all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. madmath,

    I couldn't agree more. Government is an economic parasite not a solution. I'm particularly surprised that with all the bankrupt states there are that many remain blind to this reality.

    ReplyDelete
  3. LCR, I just laid out a blog post that I think is worth your readers checking out. Madmath1 contributed to it but may not know it yet. His comment was excellent so integrated it into my post, giving him full credit for his part of course. It was he that also inspired me to write it. It is not often that I do this, I save such actions for posts that I think are our best over at KOOK's blog. Gotta go to the dentist this morning. Will be back around noon est. Check us out...

    As for your post:
    To quote Reagan: "Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other."

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good post Andrew. I love madmath's quote!

    ReplyDelete
  5. The idea of spending our way out of debt is counterintuitive. It defies all logic and reason and yet people are accepting it as a universal truth. Maybe, maybe, if we were spending the money on real investments that would actually bring a return it might work, but we're not. We're investing our money in the government instead of the people, and the analogy of a parasite is absolutely correct.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Spinterpov,

    Wheelan actually made the same arguement with regards to spending in his full article. However, he was shotting at Bush, which was a beast, but the wrong one. It was one of a couple problems I had one the whole of his piece. I thought overall his point was that Big Spend policies were irresponsible.

    In truth, government spending is never analogous to investment. To spend the government must either steal money out of an efficient economy or promise to do so in the future. Obama likes to talk about investing and savings. To invest or save requires a decision to be made. That decision is, "can I use this money better elsewhere?" When it comes to the government that answer is always no. Government is a cost of civilized society, it is not an economic producing entity.

    With that being said, the last time the government engaged in investing, we invested billions of dollars to subsidize and assist with mortgages for people without the money to pay them back. It's turned out great so far. Obama's whole policy centers around the same types of "investments."

    ReplyDelete
  7. To all of you who read my post, thank Madmath for his insights. JUst like his insights here, Madmath made an excellent point. I believe what all of you are getting at is a concept that in the 1970's was called the misery index. The misery index was generally measured by combining unemployment levels with the rate of inflation. I started measuring the misery index again 2 months ago. Since then, it has gone from 11 to 13. You think it's bad now? in 1980, the misery index hovered around 22 under Jimmy the peanut farmer. When Reagan was elected, it took only 3 years to eliminate the misery index from media jargon.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Conservative Gen - Thanks for moderating here, I see that this post got picked up by a couple other bloggers as well via a Google search. Thanks for the help

    ReplyDelete
  9. C-Gen has gained much respect from me after the Climate Blog we did. I will repeat that it was an honor to be asked to do that. Macs use a strip across the top of the screen known as a "dashboard" in their web browser where you can put your favorite sites or blogs and LCR's and C-Gens are right up there next to KOOK's on mine. Euripides and TheRightStuff are also right there too. When I put a blog in the dashboard, it means it has my highest respect and C-Gen has earned that many times over.

    ReplyDelete
  10. LCR, I like the idea of doing guest hosts. It gives people like you a break from hosting a busy blog, and it gives those who have different perspectives an opportunity to chat with lots of people that they otherwise would never interact with. LCR, you have been instrumental in helping the "manifesto" to grow and the "guest host" concept could do the same for many of our fellow bloggers. I suggest others who have bigger followings such as LCR's 132, do the same. We all want success for each other and if there is anything I can do to help a fellow blogger I would love to. Collaborating with KOOK and contributing to C-Gen's climate blog have been as rewarding as anything I have ever done as a blogger.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Andrew - I was telling Consgen that I have had some personal family issues that have deteriorated in the last few days and put a damper on my frame of mind and ability to blog as much as I would want to. I am having Sean help and trying to keep my content going as well.I'm glad that I have been able to send folks over and depending on my personal situation, I might 'snipe' some of your guy's stuff too if you don't mind. I would of course provide a great plug and link back. Also that 'cynic' guy mentioned that he had upwards of 300 folks visit his site due to his comments here. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Why change course? It's SO much fun spending the grandkids' money!

    ReplyDelete
  13. I also congratulate Madmath on his accurate observation that you can't spend your way out of debt. You can often, however, stimulate the economy by lowering taxes, resulting in an increase in tax revenue from the business expansion that the lower tax rates make possible. Reagan did it in 1981 and tax revenue tripled.

    ReplyDelete
  14. RK - Isn't it, they will be so proud of us, that we gave away their freedom for expediency.....*howling wolves in the distance*.......

    Stogie - Precisely, the left doesn't want this simple fact known, it destroys their entire redistribution ethos

    ReplyDelete
  15. One of the largest government spending programs happens to be the whole Iraq war. Not many conservatives feel comfortable facing that fact, but it is a fact. Love your bar graph, but it is missing the Bush deficit that Obama inherited.

    A word on taxes. Everyone hates taxes. But taxes pay for your roads, bridges, Police, Fire, Military, Electrical & water infrastructure, sewer, state parks & beaches, spy satellites, war, Veteran benefits, and more than I care to list here. I assume those that don't want to pay taxes don't want any of the above services.

    Social Security and Medicare. Yes they are expensive. But don't you know that the cost of treating old people without those benefits would be more costly when they wind up in the emergency room or homeless???

    How much of you have enough saved so when you reach retirement you don't need Social Security? I bet not many.

    Clinton balanced our budget. Bush blew it all and a whole lot more. I didn't see any of you complaining about your taxes during the Bush years. You must really miss those years.

    ReplyDelete

Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.