Pres. Obama and the Dems are about to present a US$ 1 trillion spending program. (How big is US$ 1 trillion? The Texas GDP is that big!)
It is incredibly called a recovery program. We call that misguided "hope and change"!
It should be called "a whole lot of pork". (I can't wait for Sen. McCain to go after this absurdity!)
It should also be called "payback time" for all of those unions and big city mayors who got out the vote!
"Mr. Obama promises he won't let the special interests gobble up these funds meant for the public good, and maybe he won't, and maybe, too, he will reverse other forces of nature, such as the rotation of the Earth.
Note that the nation's mayors already have thousands of ideas they wish to share with Mr. Obama, and that fast on their heels are governors, environmental groups, business lobbies and others who figure a billion here and a billion there and soon enough their causes are sitting pretty."
Pork, pork and more pork! There is more pork here than in of one of those "Noche Buena" dinners that my Cuban parents hosted at our household! At least, my parents called it pork. They didn't call it a "low fat dinner"!
Beyond partisanship, history does not support that the Obama program will work anyway.
It did not work in the 1930's, as we noted in a previous post.
As IBD posted today:
"In the 1930s, for instance, we went on an infrastructure binge, building new roads, dams and schools; electrifying the rural south and enlarging our ports, among other major tasks.
Granted, some infrastructure improvement was called for.
But all that activity didn't pull the country out of depression — not by a long shot.
Unemployment averaged 17% in the '30s, and it wasn't until 1941 — the start of World War II — that GDP returned to its 1929 level."
Here is my big fear: The Obama plan translates into a budget deficit of almost 8% of GDP.
If the economy does not pick up, then the deficit relative to GDP will be even greater.
How can we do that and keep inflation under control? We can't!
Want to stimulate the US economy?
Do it with free market principles.
Again there is a better way!
Check out what Mitt Romney's A Republican Stimulus Plan:
"The first is that tax cuts are part of the solution.
Harvard professor and economist Greg Mankiw points out that recent research confirms that tax cuts have a greater multiplier effect than new spending — more economic bang for the federal buck.
We should lower tax rates for middle-income families and eliminate their tax on savings altogether — no tax on interest, dividends or capital gains.
Let’s also align our corporate tax rate with those of competing nations.
These actions will rapidly expand consumption and investment, and right now, time is of the essence."
Beyond tax cuts, let's not forget about entitlements.
Pres. Bush tried to do something about Social Security. He tried to give younger workers a chance to invest in the private sector.
As Romney indicates, Social Security and entitlements are "....already reaching 60 percent of federal spending."
We want to support the new president. However, Republicans have a great opportunity to say "no" responsibly. We have a chance to move the new president in our direction.
We have plenty of articulate leaders, like Romney and our wonderful crop of governors, to explain it to the US public.
Stand up Republicans.
Voting against Obama's stimulus will force Dems to pass it and own it.
P.S. Let's go back to the summer of 1993.
Remember Pres. Clinton's tax increase? It was rejected by Republicans.
What happened in the 1994 midterms? The Dems owned it and suffered huge electoral losses!
Let Obama and the Dems own this spending monstrosity.
