Roman Around

combating liberalism and other childish notions

Posts Tagged ‘recession’

WHY NOT A CENSUS EVERY YEAR?

Posted by Andrew Roman on June 4, 2010

And just think … ObamaCare hasn’t even taken effect yet. And the Bush tax don’t expire until after this year.

If the economy continues to improve like this, we ought to reach “sick” by Christmas.  Lucky us, the Messianic Age will be shifting into overdrive soon.

The “good” news, as peddled from the top, is: Unemployment is down (from 9.9% to 9.7%) and over 430,000 new jobs hit the books in May.

But numbers can be very deceptive.

Many Americans have simply given up looking for work all across Obamanation; And of the 431,000 jobs created, a little more than 90% of them were government census jobs.

Only 41,000 private sector jobs were created in May – about 150,000 less than expected.

The President, in Maryland (on his way to Louisiana), spewed optimistic: “This is the fifth month in a row that we’ve seen job gains. And while we recognize that the recovery is still in its early stages, and that there are going to be ups and downs in the months ahead – things never go in a completely smooth line – this report is a sign that our economy is getting stronger by the day.”

If he wants to see a “smooth line,” he ought to look at his poll numbers.

The President believes the economy is getting stronger by the day, but in May, private sector job growth dropped by 81% from the previous month. 

I’d hate to see what “getting worse” looks like.

The sad fact is that the temporary census-taker jobs responsible for Obama’s “stronger economy” were literally unproductive. Nothing was created. The economy was not made stronger by paying temporary government workers to count people. Taking private money out of the economy and (in effect) redistributing it to government employees has stimulated nothing.

The creation of government jobs is never – repeat never – an indication of how well the economy is doing. How can it be? Private businesses haven’t the ability to print money. Private businesses haven’t the ability to expand the tax burden on the rest of us. With each government job created, that’s more private sector money being removed from the economy. While the private sector has the ability to create genuine wealth, the government only has the ability to confiscate and redistribute it.

That’s what the Obama Stimulus Bill was all about: creating government jobs.

Note to the President: Why not have a census every year? We’ll be down to 8.5% unemployment quicker than you can say, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”
wordpress statistics

Advertisements

Posted in Big Government, Economy, Unemployment | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

SURPRISE, SURPRISE: REAL INCOME DROPS UNDER BAM

Posted by Andrew Roman on April 13, 2010

From the, “No, Really?” file …

The Washington Times is reporting today that real personal income in the United States has dropped 3.2% since Barack Obama became the Big Cheese fifteen months ago. (It’s only been fifteen months?) This figure excludes government payouts (e.g., Social Security, food stamps, welfare in general) – all the things Democrats rely on to keep a sizeable chunk of the citizenry dependant and, thus, in their corner.

Not that it should actually come as any shock to anyone.

“This is hardly surprising,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, an economist and former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. “Under President Obama, only federal spending is going up; jobs, business startups, and incomes are all down. It is proof that the government can’t spend its way to prosperity.”

Joseph Curl at the Washington Times points out that when the Messiah was still a mere campaign-trail cliché machine, the soon-to-be President “often derided (President George W.) Bush for what he said were dramatically falling incomes for workers.”

“American families, since George Bush has been in office, have seen average family incomes go down $2,000,” Mr. Obama said in a September 2008 speech on the economy in Green Bay, Wis.

It isn’t my wont to rain on people’s parades, but an insertion of the truth right about now seems to be in order. Real income increased almost 13% during the eight years of Bush – which included an inherited Clinton-era recession and the attacks of September 11, 2001.

I can almost guarantee you won’t hear that coming out of Obama’s mouth.

The bureau, which doesn’t compile statistics on “family” income, reported that per capita income rose during Mr. Bush’s two terms, from $29,159 to $32,632 (using 2005 dollar values as a base). During Mr. Obama’s 15 months in office, per capita income has dropped nearly 1 percent to $32,343.

It must be a plot.

In fact, it probably wouldn’t surprise anyone to find out that a certain well-organized segment of the population – specifically the racist, caucasion-loving, diety-digging anti-Obama ranks – have voluntarily taken pay cuts, or agreed to leave their jobs altogether, in order to make the President look bad.

No one on the left would put it past them.

Just one question for the President and Crew: How exactly does increasing taxes help this situation?

wordpress statistics

Posted in Big Government, Economy | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

TALE OF TWO QUOTES – REDEFINING “CATASTROPHE”

Posted by Andrew Roman on March 13, 2009

“A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a catastrophe and guarantee a longer recession, a less robust recovery, and a more uncertain future.”           -Barack Obama, February 4, 2009

“I’ve never bought into these Malthusian, woe, Chicken Little, the earth is falling. I tend to be pretty optimistic … I don’t think things are ever as good as they say, or ever as bad as they say. Things two years ago were not as good as we thought because there were a lot of underlying weaknesses in the economy. They’re not as bad as we think they are now.”        -Barack Obama, March 12, 2009

______________________

Three quick points …

First, didn’t the President also say that a failure to act on passing the stimulus bill could mean the economy might never recover?

Second, didn’t Chicken Little say the sky was falling?

Third, if the economy turns around on the Obama watch, will he then acknowledge things just aren’t as good as they seem?

______________________

 

From the Liberal/English Dictionary entry catastrophe: 

Main Entry:

ca·tas·tro·phe

Pronunciation:

\kə-ˈtas-trə-(ˌ)fē\

Function:

noun

Etymology:

Greek katastrophē, from katastrephein to overturn, from kata- + strephein to turn – confiscated by American Democrat Party for political scare mongering

Date:

1540 original, February 2009 Democrat redefine

1: no biggie <failure to act will be a catastrophe>

2: false scare <this crisis will turn into a catastrophe if left alone>

3: as expected <my Presidency is a catastrophe>

 

cat·a·stroph·ic \ˌka-tə-ˈsträ-fik\ adjective

cat·a·stroph·i·cal·ly \-fi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

Posted in Bailout, Big Government, Economy, Obama's first 100 days, politics | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

CONSERVATISM, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN? GONNA STICK AROUND?

Posted by Andrew Roman on January 29, 2009

money_treeI wish conservatism would have been shaken from its sleep when  it counted. I wish we would have seen more of it throughout 2008.

Because we didn’t, we now have a brand new reality to contend with.

Yes, Obama’s stimulus package passed the House of Representatives, but Republicans proved – finally – that they are capable of locating and listening to the little conservative voices that have been (for quite a while) bound and gagged within them. They showed the world – at least for now – that they have the capacity to take inventory of their spines and stand up for something other than the collective o-gasm that has blanketed the country since The One won.

Each and every House Republican who voted yesterday – along with eleven Democrats – voted against President Obama’s $819 Billion stimulus package – The Pork Salad Bammy Government Expansion and Spending Bonanza.

Good for them.

The final vote was 244 to 188.

Why is this so important?

Because Democrats, who easily have the numbers needed to float this bill through both houses of Congress, know that they’ll need Republican votes to help absorb some of the blame if (when) this massive spending bill hits the fan as a bona-fide failure – which it will. Obmacrats know that with bi-partisan cover, the political sting of a disastrous “stimulus” washout will be easier to take.

Why else cuddle up to and tickle toes with Republicans?

After all, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reminded the world, they won and they wrote the bill. There wasn’t a damned thing “bi-partisan” about it.

Perfect. I invite them to take full responsibility for it.

Michelle Malkin writes at her blog that it was great day for conservatism.

Thank you, GOP.

It’s a sad state of affairs when I can tally the number of notably good days for the Republican Party on one hand over the past two years: the defeat of shamnesty, the (temporary) prevention of massive S-CHIP expansion, last summer’s Drill, Baby, Drill revolt on the House floor. Fortunately, the GOP held the line this evening in a remarkable, powerful way. They may have lost the vote, but they sent a lasting message. They took a stand for principle and posterity. They reclaimed their brand as the party of small government, low taxes, and fiscal responsibility. They restored their damaged credibility.

There’s no mystery in how best to rebuild the party and energize the base: Talk like conservatives. Walk like conservatives. Vote like conservatives.

Senate Republicans, take note. Don’t squander this opportunity for redemption. Make no apologies for principled obstructionism. Counter the inevitable liberal overreaching with plain facts and free-market alternatives.

That the bill passed the House is a defeat for this country. Let’s not forget that. The staggering amount of irresponsible, unnecessary, pork-barrel crap shoved into this thing is beyond disgusting. This is expressly one of those moments – and there so many of them lately – that I wanted – nay, prayed for – the President to fail.

He didn’t.

When this financial monstrosity passes the Senate – and it will – the only thing to salvage will be conservatism itself.  Anything less than a repeat of what Republicans did in the House will be unacceptable.

Can there be any doubt that given the situation, with Democrats in full control of everything, that the best thing Republicans can do is allow the entire weight of this spending frenzy to rest on the shoulders of the Savior and his minions?

Players must play the hand they’re dealt, and even with a guaranteed losing hand in this particular game, this is still the Republicans’ power play.

Make it count.

wordpress statistics

Posted in Big Government, Conservatism, Economy, Liberalism, Obama's first 100 days | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

IT’S BACK

Posted by Andrew Roman on December 2, 2008

recessionIt is official. The United States is in a recession.

And to make it that much more tasty, we have apparently been in one for about a year, according to a gaggle of economists at the National Bureau of Economic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

With the news, it’s easy to imagine high-fives a-plenty in the MSNBC break room – complete with a bunch of “See? I knew it!” and “Don’t worry! Obama will know what to do!”

Reporters, pundits, editors and producers are frantically (triumphantly) combing through their archives to see exactly when it was they first started talking about the inevitable Bush recession.

How early did they nail it?

Was it nine months ago? Two years? Who exactly was the first to peg it, and can we get him on the set?

“Tonight on HARDBALL … New York Times columnist Blah-Blah-Blahbinsky, who saw the Bush recession coming five years ago!”

Rule number one – if you continually predict gloom and/or doom, you will have the luck (and accuracy) of a broken clock.

And if you are one of those reflexive “I-hate-Bush,” all-cataclysm all-the-time pundits like, say, Paul Krugman from the New York Times, and if you are “gutsy” enough to predict an “on the horizon” calamity, it really doesn’t matter what the state of the economy is.

The unemployment rate could be below zero, every mortgage in America paid off and the need for public assistance extinguished, and it wouldn’t make a damn bit of difference. If you can forecast an economic downturn – even through fifteen years of prosperity – sprinkle in a bit a class warfare, and fold in some down-arrow numbers, you will be billed as a “visionary,” or as “brilliant,” or even a “prophet” – or some combination of the three.

Historically, the pattern has been a steady one, particularly with a Republican in the White House … Doom is either coming just around the corner, or it has already set in and is so vast that it could take a long time before someone like Obama can set things right – if he can at all.

It is what it is.

And now, the eleven-month old recession is out of the closet.

recession44To be fair – and intellectually honest – the indications of a full-fledged recession were tatooed on the collective foreheads of Americans everywhere for quite some time. Every single economic signpost pointed in that direction. Recall during the campaign, the Prez-El kept reminding us how horrible and unforgiving a nation this is.

If we weren’t in a recession, we certainly deserved to be, to atone for our heartlesness and greed.

Interesting to me, however, is that while the official announcement is brand new, the recession itself is about to celebrate a birthday.

For those who know baseball, it’s akin to saying that the United States has been put on the economic disabled list, retroactive to December, 2007.

From the USA Today:

The committee of economists responsible for determining the dates of business cycles said Monday that they met by conference call on Friday, Nov. 28 and “the committee determined that a peak in economic activity occurred in the U.S. economy in December 2007.

“The peak marks the end of the expansion that began in November 2001 and the beginning of a recession.”

While recessions are often described as two consecutive quarters of decline in economic output, that’s not the official definition.

Instead, the panel looks at a multitude of economic data, including gross domestic product, income, employment, industrial production and retail sales. The economy contracted in the July-September quarter at the fastest pace in seven years.

It’s an odd formula, to be sure. The recession was retroactively dated back to December, 2007 because that was when economic growth last peaked.

I’m not doubting it in the least, mind you.

It’s just interesting to me how the “experts” arrived at their conclusion.

The start of the recession followed a six-year expansion that began way back in November, 2001 – with the ruins of the World Trade Center still smoldering and the war in Afghanistan about a month old.

A whole lot of life has happened since then.

The fact is … The United States has been through recessions before.

This may very well be a tough one, but the nation will endure.

Of course, for the next few weeks, the Dems will be insufferable in their “I told you so” shoes, smug in that James Carville kind of blackboard-scratching way that makes you want to curse at nuns. Give the “I knew it!” brigades a couple of weeks to get the worst of it out of their systems …

-“I knew we were in recession in July.”

-“Well, I knew it in February.”

-“Yeah, well … we’ve been in a recession since Bush stole the election in 2000..”

No need to slit wrists now. 

Obama will know what to do.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »