Skip to comments.Facts are stubborn things (Part 1) [Tea Party Express](Part 2 #25)
Posted on 12/06/2011 12:26:52 PM PST by Syncro
In 2008 Barack Obamas campaign shtick was change. That resonated because President Bush was spending too much and the country meant to change Washington. But Obama meant to change the country.
What is President Obamas response to our message of fiscal responsibility? Shared sacrifice; everyone must feel his pain. By everyone he means the people, not the government. Winston Churchill was more eloquent when he observed that Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy,its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Federal employment has grown by over 100,000 positions. Federal civil servants average pay and benefits were $123,049 in 2009 while private workers that year earned $61,051 average pay and benefits, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
If the government were a company, would you buy its stock? When you hear that Obama wants to raise taxes on anyone, what you are hearing is his call for big and bigger government. The government does not deserve a pay increase. Its time to cut spending.
Obama claimed his extreme spending spree would prevent unemployment from going above 8%. Its been above that for the last 27 months. To be fair, not everyone has done poorly under Obama. Federal government union employees have prospered. Federal employment has grown by over 100,000 positions. Federal civil servants average pay and benefits were $123,049 in 2009 while private workers that year earned $61,051 average pay and benefits, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
TPX you betcha!
Thanks for the bump my friend!
The government does not “create” jobs that help our nation or economy. In fact the opposite is true. Every job the government (any government) can create costs the tax payer. What does that mean?
In the private sector, an employee either directly or indirectly provides a product or service that is valued by others. The service or produce is purchased and either consumed, used (and replaced) or sold to another for the same. Thus the cycle grows wealth and wealth increases standards of living. There is no limit to the wealth that can be created (ever). However, wealth creation has a starting point. The beneficiaries of wealth creation are those entering the job market or industry regardless of age. Eventually, and hopefully, many of those will become wealth creators themselves as they advance in society's social structure.
That is until the cycle is interrupted and those who would otherwise enter the wealth creation cycle at an entry level are plucked from the process and placed on an entitlement program that requires government worker supervision and management.
Conversely, a government job is created by paying a government worker to manage the expenditures of tax revenue for the “good of the nation.” Politicians and media elite would have you believe that hiring a government worker broadens the tax income revenue base. At what cost? If a government worker is paid $100,000/year in salary and benefits, they may pay $18,000 per year in taxes. This worker is costing the other tax payers $82,000/year.
It is hardly a good thing that the government has “added” jobs in this case.
What's worse is that the government employee produces nothing that is actually consumed or builds wealth. It is impossible for the government to “build wealth” through job creation. Indirectly, the government does make many individuals wealthy (Fannie and Freddy, Solyndra, Politicians, etc.), but at a cost to the tax paying public at large far in excess of what is made.
Wealth is only a “zero sum game” when the government intervenes and interrupts the free market capital system. Since government does not produce a consumable product or service, it can only redistribute wealth based on the revenue it collects. AND there is a cost to collecting, accounting for and redistributing this wealth that must be skimmed from the collected revenue to pay for the government management of it before it can be redistributed.
Thus government can only be a consumer of wealth, not a creator.
Some good stats, huh?
Gotta get this out there over and over again.
The really sad thing is Paul’s “draconian and unrealistic” trillion dollar first year cut would only get us back to Bush-era deficits!
WTF happened in three years? Some bunch of hogs we have at the trough!
“To be fair, not everyone has done poorly under Obama.”
No, not everyone. Some places are doing okay. The housing markets surrounding Washington DC and Manhattan have weathered the housing bust the best.
“WTF happened in three years?”
We lost over $600B in revenue between 2008 and 2009. RP’s cuts PLUS a real recovery would eliminate the deficit.
The figures I gave included the cost of the wars.
That comparison is a liberal comparison. For instance, Obama extended the “Bush Tax Cuts” so the effect of those tax cuts on the deficit should be pinned on Obama at some time.
It’s these biased plots that motivated me to do my plot. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2763628/posts It’s technically correct and gives a fairly unbiased impression
First post ever? Who do you work for?
5.07 trillion of the spending over the past decade is directly attributable to policy changes enacted by George W. Bush.
I thought only Democrats called tax cuts spending.
I don’t know who the heck you are, but the posting of that deceptive chart set off three score alarm bells. First it was obviously bunkum, and second you didn’t source it.
It is from the Jul 24, 2011, Sunday New York Times, here: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24editorial_graph2.html?ref=sunday
It was then “discussed” by James Fallows in The Atlantic, here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/07/the-chart-that-should-accompany-all-discussions-of-the-debt-ceiling/242484/ It is that discussion from which you seem to have drawn you own commentary as posted here. Who are you?
It was discussed on an FR Thread on July 29th and onwards, here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2755764/posts
That deceptive chart was debunked by Ed Morrissey on Hot Air on 26 July, using much better data and charts from the Heritage Foundation, here: http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/26/charts-of-the-day/
Ed points out that the chart uses static budget modeling, a major and alone of itself, a fatal flaw, but common for those taking deceptive paths.
As Ed says the chart confuses what tax cuts are and declares them as a form of government spending — strictly a delusional liberal confusion, one ALL conservatives and the sane reject. The chart is also quite quite mad (in the insane sense of “mad”) to declare that Obama’s projected increases in spending over the next eight years will be only 1.44 T. That’s way way way low.
Wow. Great minds think alike. I was next about to post a different rendering of that same graphic, per DJ MacWoW’s post 9 on the FR thread (started by Recovering_Democrat) that I linked above.
It’s gonna be a long hard fight, but with all they are doing to destroy this country it’s like them saying “bring it”
And bring it we will!
thanks for the ping.
So the Democrats were responsible for the bursting of the housing bubble even though Republicans controlled both houses of congress and the Executive branch until the peak of the housing bubble in 2007.
This is Part 2 of a 2 part commentary. If you missed Part 1, you can read it here.
Part 1 ended with the idea that Its time to cut spending. The left blames the Iraq war for deficits, but that just doesn't add up.
Obama and the left claim apocalypse will occur if you cut anything from the budget. Any time someone claims that immediate spending cuts will harm the economy -ignore them, laugh at them, mock them. You know why? Because spending never goes down. Never. Republicans, Democrats and the Press all deceive you when they use the word cut. When businesses cut expenses, spending declines. When people cut their bills, they spend less. But when government cuts spending, the total amount spent still rises, always. And the Press never explains this properly.
While any tax increase occurs immediately, another sleight of hand is that the spending cuts are planned for the last couple of years of any ten year deal, as in years eight, nine, and ten. So they know it will never happen. Its four or five Congresses from now. Laws change. Deals are forgotten. Promises are broken. The only thing that really matters is next years budget. Will it be less than the previous year? Now that would be a real cut. All that other deal stuff? Increased spending. Politicians want deals; Americans want solutions.
Obama used the word balanced so many times in the recent debt-limit debate it must focus-group well, but the only thing he never would accept was a balanced budget. He claims he inherited his problems. Well get over it. Every president inherits the problems left behind by the previous administration.
Ill tell you what else Obama inherited, a triple-A credit rating. He tried to blame losing that on the Tea Party! First they claim the Tea Party is fake, astro-turf, small and losing influence; then they turn around and claim we are so powerful we impacted the entire economy of the United States. I guess being President isnt enough power. Obama should try organizing a community Tea Party.
Obama loves to blame others for his poor job performance: Its Bushs fault. Obama demonized Bush as an evil fool, but Obama has adopted and continued many of Bushs policies, and justifies the bad result by saying Bush did it first! The Press lets him have it both ways, but we know better. He said we should change what Bush was doing, and a majority agreed. The problem is, Obama made it worse.
Obama has never before run on a record. Hes always run almost literally on words. Hypnotic charm, clever phrases spoken with flare. Speechwriters and tele-prompters. Now he must defend what he has done, and what he has failed to do.
What is Obamas record? Sustained high unemployment as a new norm; he has lost the AAA credit rating; he has added more to the national debt than any other president ever; he has more than tripled the annual deficit; he has implemented socialized medicine with Obamacare while health insurance costs continue to rise; he has failed to stimulate the economy; he has stopped off shore domestic oil exploration making us more dependent upon foreign sources for energy.
Food costs more. Fuel costs more. Housing values have plummeted. More Americans are on Food Stamps than ever in history. Real median household income has declined since Obama took office.
Obama claims he has leveled off the economy. If Obama were a pilot and he crashed a plane into the ground, would you say he leveled off?Answering this failed record the administration says it hasnt spent enough. But Obama doesnt seem to learn from history. Henry Morgenthau Jr., the Secretary of Treasury for FDR testified before the House Ways and Means Committee on May 9, 1939 saying We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work We have never made good on our promises after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started .and an enormous debt to boot!
Nobody has ever spent a country into prosperity, but Obamas dogma wont allow him to learn from history.
The recent victory in Wisconsin shows us the way forward. Gov. Walker brought a $3.6 billion budget deficit into a surplus in less than 6 months without raising taxes. He did it by gaining control over the spending obligations. Its time to follow that lead nationwide. Revenues will increase through more prosperity. Grow the number of taxpayers by increasing employment rather than taking an ever larger share from those already struggling. Economic growth is the only way out of debt.
President Ronald Reagan said Freedom is not something to be secured in any one moment of time. We must struggle to preserve it every day. And Freedom is never more than one generation from extinction.
If we intend on passing the torch of freedom to the next generation, let us return our government to its Constitutional moorings. That would be real change. Let us not grow weary in the effort. Our nations future depends upon our vigilance. Our freedoms, and that of our posterity, depend upon it.
We here at the Tea Party Express are guided by our slogan of "Restore Liberty - Honor the Constitution" and our 6 basic principles:
- No more bailouts
- Reduce the size and intrusiveness of government
- Stop raising our taxes
- Repeal Obamacare
- Cease out-of-control spending
- Bring back American prosperity and jobs
I want to comment on your first plot.
The Iraq war did not cause the deficit.
The Bush tax cuts did not cause the deficit.
The failure of the economy to preform as predicted after the Bush tax cuts did not cause the deficit.
The Medicare Prescription Drug program did not cause the deficit.
Other changes to SS and Medicare did not cause the deficit.
The discretionary spending increases, i.e,. NCLB, etc., did not cause the deficit.
The tax cut of 2008 did not cause the deficit.
TARP did not cause the deficit.
And so on......
The stock market crash of 2008 is causing about 1/3 to 1/2 of our deficit today but not all of it. Not by a long shot.
It was the accumulation of all these things over a ten year period that caused the deficit. It wasn’t just Republican pigs at the trough of government. It wasn’t just Democratic pigs. It was all of them with dozens of different programs and none of them giving a GD about their cumulative effect.
Preach it! bttt
Onward to Victory 2012! TPX!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.