The Real Obama Legacy, Part 2: The Economy

Peter Baggins and Kevin MacDonald

See also: Part 1: Foreign Policy

Shortly after his inauguration in 2009, President Obama invited Republican leaders in Congress to the White House to discuss their proposals for stimulating the economy. In this gesture of goodwill he failed to mention that House Democrats had already drafted and passed a stimulus bill without consulting them. Every GOP idea had been left out.

Even a minor concession or two would have gone a long way toward gaining Republican votes, with the result that Republicans would have inherited part ownership of the stimulus package. But as no concessions were offered, every House Republican voted against the bill, as did all but three in the Senate.

Then came Obamacare which was put together in the office of then-majority leader Harry Reid. No Republicans were invited to that party either and consequently none voted for it. Democrats became sole proprietors of Obamacare.

Politically speaking, this approach was justified. But there happens to be great value in compromise and bipartisanship. On big matters that involve the entire country and affect most Americans, they are critical. They act like a seal of national approval. When both parties agree, controversial measures are no longer in serious dispute. When one party insists on having its way, controversy lingers.

Obamacare is a prime example. As a product of bipartisan compromise, it would have been less unpopular than it is now. But as wholly owned property of the president and Democrats, forced on an unwilling public, it’s loathed. For Democratic candidates, it’s an albatross. In short order, Obama lost the House majority he brought with him into office, then the Senate.

Obama’s relations with Republicans have worsened since then. In 2011, he and House speaker John Boehner agreed to a $4 trillion deal of spending cuts and tax hikes. But this “grand bargain” unraveled when Obama insisted on hundreds of billions more in tax revenue. Boehner promptly pulled out, saying he couldn’t trust Obama to honor a deal. Obama had throws away a breakthrough that might have enhanced his economic legacy.

Advertisement - Time to SUBSCRIBE now!

Thus ended Obama’s minimalist efforts to cooperate with Republicans in Congress. After his re-election in 2012 he announced he would use his pen and the phone to handle Congress. Rather than negotiate with Republicans, he mainly used his pen to sign an unprecedented number of executive orders. No need to discuss, cooperate, or compromise on those. Throughout his second term he routinely exceeded his constitutional authority by signing orders rather than passing legislation.

Now, in his final month in office Obama seeks to secure his legacy by introducing a last-minute barrage of costly environmental regulations. This adds to his administration’s dubious record of producing more than 600 major regulations, at a cost of more than $100 million each, according to a study by the American Action Forum, a Washington-based think tank.

Related to this legacy of stifling over-regulation is the fact that the U.S. is now 19.95 trillion dollars in debt (as of December 2016). Obama added an additional $7.917 trillion to America’s national debt, which amounts to a 68 percent increase from the $11.657 trillion debt level Bush accrued by the end of his presidency.

But according to Obama himself, echoed by the MSM, he has done a really great job overall and America is “indisputably better off” economically today than it was when he took office.

At first glance one would think that more than any other aspect of Obama’s legacy, the economy is a matter of fact rather than ideological spin.  But consider this Nov 30, 2016 statement by White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest. In his press briefing he said that 805,000 manufacturing jobs have been created since President Barack Obama has been in office. But a quick fact check by a liberal leaning watchdog indicates that there has been a net loss of 303,000 manufacturing jobs since Obama took office in January 2009.

Earnest made the statement on the day that Carrier announced a deal with President-elect Donald Trump so that the company would “continue to manufacture gas furnaces in Indianapolis, in addition to retaining engineering and headquarters staff, preserving more than 1,000 jobs.”

Earnest’s intention to undermine Trump’s achievement was clear when he fabricated this lie to the American people and then taunted Trump by adding that “Trump would have to make another 804 deals like that to equal the number of manufacturing jobs created while Obama has been president.”

So given this state of affairs, let’s fact check Obama’s “indisputably better off” claim against eight key metrics of economic health: the federal debt, the gross domestic product annual growth rate, the unemployment rate, labor participation rates, median annual income, home ownership rates, health care costs, and reliance upon food stamps (see America’s economy before Obama versus after Obama,” Breitbart, 11/29/2016).

  1. As already mentioned, the federal debt has doubled to nearly $20,000,000,000. And counting…
  2. Obama has overseen the worst economic growth of any President since Herbert Hoover, and has not had a single year that saw an annual growth of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) that reached or exceeded 3%. CNS News reported that all of Obama’s predecessors since JFK, whose administration saw annual growth of real GDP peak “at 6.1 percent in 1962,” have seen far more robust economic growth. Obama’s eight years pale in comparison to Ronald Reagan’s eight years between 1981 and 1989, where “annual growth in real GDP peaked at 7.3 percent in 1984.”
  1. The good news was that the unemployment rate declined from 7.6% in January 2009 to 4.9% in October 2016, and the number of employed increased by 9.8 million and the number of unemployed decreased by 3.8 million. However, the bad news was that the number of Americans not in the labor force increased by 13.5 million.
  2. This latter statistic reflects that fact that the labor participation rate declined from 65.8% in February 2009, shortly after Obama took office in the midst of a recession, to 62.8% in October 2016 (Bureau of Labor Statistics). Thus 94,333,000 Americans were not in the labor force in July 2016. In September 2015, the labor force participation rate dropped to 62.4 percent, its lowest point since 1977.
  3. Median household annual income has remained stagnant in real terms under Obama — 1.5% lower ($884) than it was in January 2008 just as the recession was beginning, but substantially above its low point of August 2011.
  4. The home ownership rate declined from 67.3 percent in the first quarter of 2009 to 63.5 percent in the third quarter of 2016.
  5. Health insurance rates, both for employer-sponsored programs and Obamacare, increased significantly between January 2009 and November 2016. Breitbart:

“In 2008, the average employer-sponsored family plan cost a total of $12,680, with employees footing $3,354 of the bill…. By 2016, the cost of the average employer family plan was up to $18,142 for the year, with workers picking up $5,277 of the tab.”

And it’s getting worse. Obamacare premiums are set to skyrocket an average of 22% for the benchmark silver plan in 2017.

  1. The number of individuals receiving food stamps increased from 33.5 million in January 2009 to 44.2 million in August 2016, an increase of 10.7 million. Enrollment in the food stamp program has soared by 32 percent in the years since President Obama first took office, a new report finds.


Six of these eight metrics show that Americans are demonstrably worse off in November 2016 than they were in January 2009, when President Obama was inaugurated. The two metrics which show nominal improvement—the unemployment rate and median annual income—come with significant caveats.

While the measured unemployment rate has declined under Obama, the dramatic increase in the number of those not participating in the labor force, the huge increase in those on food stamps, and stagnant median household annual income in real terms, suggest that those two economic metrics represent illusory gains.

On the face of it, Obama’s economic plan is to expand the dependent population by exporting manufacturing jobs, swelling the numbers on welfare, disability, and those out of the labor force, continue to import millions of uneducated, economically dependent foreigners, but to make everyone at least minimally happy with payments from the government so they continue to vote for the Democrats who are indisputably more favorable to the welfare state than the GOP.

With six of these eight economic metrics lower in 2016 than they were in January 2009, and with the two improved metrics qualified at best, it is hard to conclude that America is “indisputably better off” economically today—compared to January 2009.

In his last press conference as President Obama made his case once again that as president, he was great for the economy:

“As I was preparing to take office, the unemployment rate was on its way to 10 percent,” he noted. “Today it is at 4.6 percent, the lowest in nearly a decade.”

In contrast here is how Trump depicts the last 8 years:

President Obama has weakened our military by weakening our economy. He’s crippled us with wasteful spending, massive debt, low growth, a huge trade deficit and open borders. Our manufacturing trade deficit with the world is now approaching $1 trillion a year. We’re rebuilding other countries while weakening our own. Ending the theft of American jobs will give us resources we need to rebuild our military, which has to happen and regain our financial independence and strength.

Because Trump was elected on his promise to restore American jobs, I have chosen to focus the remainder of this brief essay on job loss due to outsourcing jobs to places like China and Mexico.

Outsourcing the American Dream

Jobs outsourced to China have continuously reduced American employment opportunities and have helped contribute to wage erosion since 2001, when China entered the World Trade Organization. Between 2001 and 2013, the US trade deficit with China increased by $240.1 billion ($21.8 billion on average per year). During this period the trade deficit with China cost the U.S. 3.2 million jobs, three quarters of which were in manufacturing, according to the Economic Policy Institute report.

By 2015 the U.S. trade deficit with China jumped to $365.7 billion. This is a new record, up from the 2014 record of $343 billion. The deficit is always increasing because, for more than a decade, China has exported about $4 worth of goods to the United States for each $1 of goods that it imports. A lot of the Chinese exports, such as consumer electronics, clothing, and machinery, are from U.S.-based companies that send raw materials to China for low-cost assembly. Because most American companies can’t compete with China’s low costs, millions of U.S. jobs have been lost due to outsourcing, facilitated by

Because China consistently distorts market forces through government subsidies, preferential loans, and currency manipulation, they can produce goods at lower cost than US companies. They pay lower wages to workers, and manipulate an exchange rate in which the yuan is always priced lower than the dollar. If the dollar loses value, China buys dollars through U.S. Treasuries to support it. In this way, the yuan’s value is always within a target range of 2 percent.

The passive resignation of the Obama administration to this growing problem is precisely the kind of response that infuriates the newly unemployed class of American workers who gave Trump the 2016 election. Thanks to the Obama administration’s globalist ideology, China is now the world’s largest economy and the largest lender to the U.S. Government. As of September 2016, the U.S. debt to China was $1.157 trillion. Many are concerned that this gives China political leverage over U.S. fiscal policy since it could call in its loan. (Source: “Major Foreign Holdings of Treasury Securities, U.S. Treasury.)

In their Outsourcing America: What’s Behind Our National Crisis and How We Can Reclaim American Jobs, Ron and Anil Hira note that despite the enormity of the stakes for all Americans, a state of denial exists among US policymakers.

To convince Americans of outsourcing’s benefits, corporate outsourcers sponsor misleading one-sided “studies.” Only a small handful of people have looked objectively at the issue. These few and the large number of Americans whose careers have been destroyed by outsourcing have a different view of outsourcing’s impact. But so far there has been no debate, just a shouting down of skeptics as “protectionists.

The Hira brothers also cite a University of California study that concludes that 14 million white-collar jobs are vulnerable to being outsourced offshore. The authors note that these are the jobs of the American Dream, the jobs of upward mobility that generate the bulk of the tax revenues that fund our education, health, infrastructure, and social security systems.

The authors point out that “the track record for the re-employment of displaced US workers is abysmal: “The Department of Labor reports that more than one in three workers who are displaced remains unemployed, and many of those who are lucky enough to find jobs take major pay cuts.”

The result is a lose-lose situation for American employees, American businesses, the American government and for the American people as a whole.

The national security implications of outsourcing can no longer be ignored.  The steel and aluminum industries are essential to our national defense industrial base.  If U.S. steel production is hollowed out by unfair Chinese competition, the U.S. could be placed in the vulnerable position of having to rely on foreign countries for critical commodities. Obama’s legacy of passivity regarding these issues has inevitably eroded America’s superpower status, hence the appeal of Trump’s main message: “Make America Great Again”.

Trump has already begun the task of reshaping trade relations with China by naming outspoken China critic, Peter Navarro, to lead a new White House office overseeing American trade and industrial policy. Navarro, who is a professor at the University of California, Irvine, and holds a doctorate from Harvard, is the author of a series of books critical of China’s unfair trade practices and a 2012 documentary film, Death by China.

Eight years ago when he was running for president, Obama criticized President Bush’s deficit spending, calling it “irresponsible” and “unpatriotic.” Obama said at a presidential campaign event on July 3, 2008:

The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents — 43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome. So we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.

By December 2016 Obama has added far, far more to the U.S. debt than Bush or any president in history. As he leaves office he continues to add to his total of over 260 executive orders, while at the same time he advised Trump not to issue too many executive orders.

The left, believing that they would control the presidency for years to come because of the demographic changes they have engineered (with the complicity of the GOP), doubtless felt that executive rule was a good thing — no need to deal with all those flyover Republican Congress people. It’s a great precedent for Trump.

Obama’s legacy of hypocrisy and arrogance (and that of his press secretary) is a testament to his disdain for the intelligence of the American people. Fortunately not all Americans have succumbed to the ideological propaganda honed by the Obama administration and their fervent supporters in the MSM over the past 8 years. We will soon have a new American President, but we remain stuck with a MSM that is bristling with anger over repeated exposures their bias, not to mention their frustration that their much hoped for utopian dream of complete domination was at hand with the ascension of Hillary Clinton has been shattered.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

13 Comments to "The Real Obama Legacy, Part 2: The Economy"

  1. Luke's Gravatar Luke
    December 29, 2016 - 3:11 am | Permalink

    “Obama’s legacy of hypocrisy and arrogance (and that of his press secretary) is a testament to his disdain for the intelligence of the American people.”

    I would have to say that I, too, have an almost infinite level of disdain for the intelligence of the average American voting age citizen on the street. And, in particular, a disdain for the White American voters who helped put this virulently anti-White, contemptuously anti-Western, anti-traditional American, Communist-Marxist-Socialist, mixed race guy into the most powerful position of authority in this nation not once, but twice.

    I mean, let’s be honest. Anyone who bothered to spend a few measly hours online, digging into this guy’s bio and history would have known that he has had a ‘Hate Whitey’ chip on his shoulder almost from the first day he emerged from his coal burning White mother’s womb. And, this critical information was available for anyone who chose to look for it – long BEFORE he took office for his first term. So, in essence – due to the laziness and lack of intelligence of the average White guilt ridden White American voter – they helped elect a guy to the White House who had deep rooted grievances and feelings of intense animosity and resentment for traditional White America and then, when he spends his entire 8 years in office doing everything he possibly can to destroy traditional America and to pursue the genocidal minoritization of the White majority – who he passionately despises, why should anyone be surprised by his destructive track record?

    The guy is smart enough to realize that exporting middle class jobs that pay decent salaries is going to hit the White middle class with the greatest impact. And, likewise – hasn’t just about the entire globalist agenda been designed to inflict damage on that same White middle class? Are we to believe that the fact that Whites were hit the hardest by these globalist policies of outsourcing, off-shoring, importing H1-B visa scabs, etc., was just a coincidence, or should we remove the blinders from our eyes and recognize that the ultimate objective of these (((globalists))) – from the beginning – has been to devise and implement policies that were intended to inflict damage upon the traditional White American family? I mean, if White married couples are deprived of stable, decent paying middle class salaries and dependable careers – would that not tend to help reduce the number of White children that White married couples might decide to have?

    These dots are all easily connected, if one sits down and really thinks about how they all play into our (((enemy’s))) White genocide agenda.

    • Peter Baggins's Gravatar Peter Baggins
      December 29, 2016 - 11:31 am | Permalink

      Well said. But to put the quote you cited in context, the very next sentence reads: “Fortunately not all Americans have succumbed to the ideological propaganda honed by the Obama administration and their fervent supporters in the MSM over the past 8 years.” But no one can deny that far too many whites continue to support a party that seeks their demise. As we said in a previous article, Trump’s election may be regarded as a temporary reprieve from the policy of politically correct white vilification that we have suffered under for 8 years, “but we remain stuck with a MSM that is bristling with anger over repeated exposures to their bias” and they will ratchet up their anti-white, anti-Trump hate speech while the Dems are out of office.

    • Ronnie's Gravatar Ronnie
      January 2, 2017 - 11:40 am | Permalink

      Exactly. Obama’s personal agenda overlaps significantly if not entirely with the Jewish strategy. He was groomed and selected by the elite Jewish oligarchy of Chicago and their world order. Then the Jewish MSM had him elected. As planned he was surrounded by hofjuden during his 8 year reign. And they reined him in where and when necessary. But they could not totally control his Muslim soul. At the end he defied them and set the cat among the pigeons. But other cats have been loosed and Israel is already under scrutiny. Our magnificent Jewish MSM could not get Hillary elected and could not stop Trump. The people are getting more clued in and are beginning to see the hypocrisy of jewish power that has only hurt the prospects of Americans.

  2. RoyAlbrecht's Gravatar RoyAlbrecht
    December 29, 2016 - 3:20 am | Permalink

    I travelled, worked and studied in North Korea and China…, including Tibet & Xinjiang autonomous regions, for a total of nine months between 1989 and 1994 using the North West Frontier Province of Pakistan, Japan and S. Korea as my home bases.
    It was a tumultuous period.
    The Afghanistan war rages as did the Kashmiri conflict and just months after the Tiananmen Square massacre,
    followed by the clamp downs on dealings with foreigners in China,
    then in late 1992, the sudden recognition of Israel as a Nation State by PRChina, followed by a flood of Jew-controlled, Transnational Corporations that formed Joint-Venture Multi-national Corporations with the Chinese communist governments,
    followed by trade liberalization and the steady outsourcing of to China of not only the North American industrial base, but much of the European one as well.
    American Jews were the leading pushers behind the outsourcing of American industries because Jews were the overall net beneficiaries, per capita, of all the outsourcing.
    Sure, 51% of all the Joint Venture Companies were owned by the Communists, but all it took was one corrupt Chinese stake holder to give control of the Venture to the minority (49%) Jew stakeholder.
    In effect, Jews traded N. America’s and Europe’s industrial base to the Chinese…,
    in which the Jew owned Euro-American MSM helped swindle the American and European public into accepting…,
    for concessions to Jewish owned “Trans-National Corporations” and the recognition of Israeli
    (acting as a middle man…, selling every industrial and military secret they could steal, to the Chinese) as a legitimate Nation State.

    So in effect, America was gutted by cheap Chinese labour, something that Trump continually harps on and on about,
    but the per capita bulk of the profits went to the individual Jewish “minority stake holders” who held 49% ownership of the Chinese operations.
    So is it any wonder the Jews supported “free trade” (Read: Fukk Whitey) with China?

    • Sam J.'s Gravatar Sam J.
      December 31, 2016 - 11:33 pm | Permalink

      “…In effect, Jews traded N. America’s and Europe’s industrial base to the Chinese…”

      I believe this too. Remember all the takeovers of American run companies in the 80’s with junk bonds. Who do you think got control of those companies with junk bonds? Once they got control either they looted the company, outsourced the labor or let it fail. They didn’t care…no empathy. A lot of these companies weren’t go getter silicon valley types but they did make a profit and paid a lot of decent wages with pensions. A lot were also the basic industrial types that you need to underpin a more advanced economy. The shit-head Romney did a lot of these deals. They would charge the company huge “advice” fees. Some couldn’t make it with the huge debt piled on them. All of the workers in every single one of the taken over debt stressed companies suffered.

      • RoyAlbrecht's Gravatar RoyAlbrecht
        January 2, 2017 - 5:08 am | Permalink

        Precisely…, the Jew instigated Iran Iraq war lead to a massive Jewish take over of failed White businesses. Once White owners were dispossessed the outsourcing began.
        Now however…,
        from what I gathered from German language business news reports…,
        many “German” Joint Venture Multi-national Corporations are returning from China to base their production facilities within Eastern Europe (Czech & Magyar zones being chief beneficiaries).
        Reasons sighted are;
        1) strengthening of the Chinese Yuan and the higher costs of labour associated with this,
        2) endemic corruption from top to bottom of the Chinese people. Sorry if this insults my Chinese friends, but the honest ones have to agree with me…, generally speaking ‘If it ain´t nailed down…, a Chinese person will try to steal it.”
        3) Shipping costs to the Euro and American zones,
        4) problems trying to enforce quality control standards (i.e. to make up for low pay, the Chinese will steal the grease meant for the bearings and leave the bearings un-greased)
        5) there were others but I forgot them.

        This brings us to the present…, if the “Germans” are doing it…, the “rest of the West” will be sure to follow.
        IMO, Trumps rhetoric against the Chinese, Mexicans, Japanese, and so forth is something the Jews are probably in agreement with. This may be especially so now that the Labour Unions in the USA and Canada have been largely broken or have had their real wages stagnate for over 30 years.
        If Jews liquidate their assets in China and sell their Yuan to the IMF, they can then relocate in non-unionized low wage areas in (formerly?) White nations (i.e Black and Mexican/Asian slums in the USA) and with any luck…, utilize work visa programs for Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, and new African arrivals in both the Eurozone and America to fill their relocated factories with low paid higher skilled labour.
        Trump must see the potential of this as a Hotelier who depends on low wage, East Europeans to build and Mexican (in the USA) and Filipino or Thai (in the Eurozone) labour to service keep his businesses profitably.
        America will become great again…, great for Jews that is.
        Whites will have to get used to working at or below Indian and Chinese-American pay rates if they are in the traditional Engineering fields.

        Mean while, the shoddily constructed buildings in the third world,
        which were constructed below European standards and are generally not worth the concrete they were built with,
        will serve as convenient backdrops in the (((Western MSM))) once collapsed in a heap of rubble either due to “natural disasters” (i.e. earth quakes that would not harm a similarly hit Japanese build structure) or (((“war torn areas”))) to pull at the heart strings of Jew-induced psychotic Whites to increase Third World Immigration out of compassionate reasons.

        Just a thought…

  3. Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
    December 29, 2016 - 6:34 am | Permalink

    I will not try to defend Obama, but politico-speak allows him to say, factually, that 85,000 manufacturing jobs have been created. It is entirely possible that, across the US over the last 8 years there are 85,000 new manufacturing jobs. Therefore his statement would be technically correct, but contextually false.

    Trade policies are not the problem, trade agreements are. The WTO is the globalists wet dream. Even the oldest GATT agreements were vastly superior.
    The concept of “dumping” has been eliminated. The electronic devices sold in the US (and Canada) referenced in the article are made in country that uses a different power configuration – 50Hz as opposed to 60Hz in the US. Those who have tried to play tapes, cassettes, CDs, DVDs etc will understand that the processors cannot play the device properly. All of the electronics made in Asia and sold in the US are useless in the country of origin. The same could be said for most Japanese made autos. When the Lexus was first introduced the ads referred to it as “ein Deutches auto”. It was indeed assembled and mostly manufactured in Germany, but only sold into North America. How is that not “dumping”?
    The big winner in all of this, of course, is the Bank of International Settlements. Say what you want about the Bolivarian Revolution, but it is certainly the greatest threat to our owners since the NSDAP.
    Open borders, whether for trade or people, is that which enslaves us.

  4. December 29, 2016 - 12:10 pm | Permalink

    When Obama came to power, he wanted the 2016 olympics to be held in Chicago. In his mind, he wouldn’t even have wanted to be elected for another term. In 8 years he would have changed the world forever, irreversibly. That means, hundreds of millions of Muslims more across Europe, US, all the White countries. That’s what change means to him. He was so sure about it, and nearly succeeded.

    • December 29, 2016 - 7:57 pm | Permalink

      The 2016 olympic games, in his mind, would be the crowning celebration of his success, that altered the world forever, being done with evil White people. This is actually akin to the 1936 olympics in Berlin, 80 years earlier. How funny to see millions of Germans in the streets worship Obama, “please redeem us from our evil past. Yes you can.” Redeem he would, through their extermination. Nearly succeeded. Overrated, unexperienced, thick though evil as Obama is, he did succeed in another endeavor. The White interest movement is never gonna go anywhere, it will be around forever now, and will have its successes. Trump and Brexit could be the opening shots. They don’t control propaganda. Their matras are basically an empty echo chamber. They still have the power, we must creep in faster. Yes, I said creep in. Back in time, Jews creeped in into power in our White countries. Now we have to redeem what’s ours by creeping in. Reminiscent of King Lion movie.

  5. Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
    December 29, 2016 - 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Well said, indeed, Luke & Peter. I recall that H.L. Mencken once made some caustic comments about ‘never underestimate the intelligence of the [White] American voter’, and ‘if given the chance, they would put a moron in the White House’. Bingo with Bush and Obama! These are the Amerikinder that Jewry has intellectually poisoned, and is currently riding to extinction.

  6. Deep North's Gravatar Deep North
    December 29, 2016 - 3:08 pm | Permalink

    The American economy is a consumer driven debt based economy which is enabled by the Federal Reserve Bank and America’s ability to have it’s currency used as world money. In order to consume, one must produce: our country produces very little but consume a lot; this is due to debt. As much as I loathe outsourcing, Asians are producing for us while we give them IOUs which we have no intent on paying back and if we do, they’ll get paid back in inflated dollars. This can’t go on forever, eventually the money runs out or people will stop lending us money. Our national debt should be considered a national security issue. Interest rates can’t go lower, only higher; if that happens, the interest on the national debt will make this country instantly financially insolvent. No amount of tax cuts, Wall Street bailouts and stimulus spending will help us in that situation. Republicans including Trump always talk about tax cuts and never spending cuts (and yes the military should be considered part of “big gubmint” that they’re always complaining about). Cut taxes and spending. Go down the list of federal departments and agencies: education, gone; housing, gone and so on. Republicans can pull the rug out from the leftist educational establishment if they got rid of the Department of Education. I doubt they’ll make huge spending cuts in four years: that would be unpopular with the public, so they’ll go with the usual tax cut route. They always try to balance the budget over ten years, like that will ever happen. I understand the basic concept of free trade and comparative advantage: some people/countries are better at producing more goods than others. I should be able to buy foreign goods if I want to. I think Glock (Austrian) makes better handguns than S&W. So who is the government or anyone else to try and tell me different and limit my purchasing options? I realize the horror show that free trade has turned into as well: billion dollar American companies moving offshore and paying peanuts to Third World workers and destroying the local environment with pollution. Corporations need to realize that all workers aren’t created equal (IQ). The American industrial revolution was built on the backs of white workers. If this economy is heading into a post-industrial economy, we don’t need unskilled low IQ 3rd world immigrants. Economist, academics and businessmen need to realize that workers aren’t machines; they can’t be thrown away into the obsolete junk pile. We work because we have to feed and house ourselves. The economy will only go so far in lowering the cost of goods; I still have to make money in order to buy those goods. Sorry you can’t make $15 an hour working in fast food and maybe the industrial unions got a little greedy too. And don’t billion companies feel embarrassed that they rely on modern day slave labor to produce their goods?

  7. Sam J.'s Gravatar Sam J.
    December 30, 2016 - 8:35 pm | Permalink

    All of what you said is true. I’m not his fan boy but we ought to give him credit for no war with Iran. I do admire him for that.

  8. HK Wills's Gravatar HK Wills
    January 2, 2017 - 6:19 pm | Permalink

    What should also be mentioned is the real unemployment rate, the labor department’s metric called U6, has been running between 11 and 13% during Obama’s tenure. During the Clinton administration U3 was substituted since it does not include those who have given up looking for work after losing their jobs. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, Undersecretary of the Treasury during the Reagan administration has written about this act of obfuscation. It gets worse: many of the jobs created during the last 8 years were part time, benefit-less jobs: junk jobs. David Stockman, former OMB Director in the Reagan administration has pointed out there has been no net “breadwinner” job creation in the century. This despite the growth of the working age population by millions. He also analyzed the unemployment rate from a labor hours utilization rate (the total amount of hourly labor available minus the amount employed) perspective and finds the better metric is the unemployment/underemployment rate, and it is about 40%. This metric takes into consideration people who are working part time but would like to work full time and cannot find the jobs. It also takes into account those who are underemployed given their education and work history.

    Given that Asia has an absolute advantage in labor costs, rather than a comparative one, the only way for jobs to be returned to the US is either by tariffs on goods produced off shore or tax reductions in exchange for relocating production in the US, or a mix of the two. The policy would have to nullify the cost advantage of off shoring such that nothing would be gained by doing so.

Comments are closed.