Obama Presidency Is An Economic Disaster

Today, Obama declared that his administration has “stopped the bleeding” and “stabilized the economy.”
What planet does he live on? Every economic indicator points to his 19-month presidency as being an unmitigated economic disaster for America.
First, Obama has accomplished the signal feat of adding more to the U.S. national debt — an increase of $2.526 trillion to a total of $8.833 trillion — than all presidents from Washington through Reagan combined.
As reported by Terence P. Jeffrey of CNSNews on September 8, 2010, at the end of fiscal year 1989, which ended 8 months after President Reagan left office, the total federal debt held by the public was $2.1907 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. That means all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan had accumulated only that much publicly held debt on behalf of American taxpayers.
When Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, the total federal debt held by the public stood at 6.3073 trillion, according to the U.S. Treasury Dept’s Bureau of the Public Debt. As of Aug. 20, 2010, after 19 months in office, the Obama administration managed to accumulate $8.833 in total federal debt, an increase of $2.5260 trillion.
 
Nor is this Bush’s fault. In just the last 4 months (May through August), according to the CBO, the Obama administration has run cumulative deficits of $464 billion, more than the $458 billion deficit the Bush administration ran through the entirety of fiscal 2008.
The first two fiscal years in which Obama has served will see the two biggest federal deficits as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product since the end of World War II of 9.9% and 9.1%, respectively.
 
If that doesn’t grab your attention, how about this: The U.S. national debt is now more than all the money in the world!
Kevin Williamson of NationalReview.com informs us, on September 9, that our national debt is between $70 trillion and what some say is the real national debt of $130 trillion.
Even the lower end figure of $70 trillion means the U.S. debt exceeded more than all the money in the world. In 2008, the entire supply of money in the world (“broad money,” i.e., global M3, meaning cash, consumer-account deposits, checkable accounts, CDs, long-term deposits, travelers’ checks, money-market funds, the whole enchilada) was estimated to be just under $60 trillion.
Our third and last economic indicator is the number of poor Americans. Under Obama, America’s poverty rate has gone from 13.2% to 15%.
Hope Yen and Liz Sidoti of the Associated Press report on September 12, 2010 that the number of people in the U.S. who are in poverty is on track for a record increase on Obama’s watch, with the ranks of working-age poor approaching 1960s levels that led to the national war on poverty.
Census figures for 2009 — the recession-ravaged first year of Obama’s presidency — are to be released in the coming week, and demographers expect grim findings. Interviews with six demographers who closely track poverty trends found wide consensus that 2009 figures are likely to show a significant rate increase from 13.2% to the range of 14.7% to 15%.
Should those estimates hold true, some 45 million people in this country, or more than 1 in 7, were poor last year. It would be the highest single-year increase since the government began calculating poverty figures in 1959. The all-time high was 22.4% in 1959, the first year the government began tracking poverty. It dropped to a low of 11.1% in 1973 after Johnson’s war on poverty but has since fluctuated in the 12-14% range.
Demographers also expect the report will show:

  • Child poverty increased from 19% to more than 20%.
  • Blacks and Latinos were disproportionately hit, based on their higher rates of unemployment.
  • Metropolitan areas that posted the largest gains in poverty included Modesto, Calif.; Detroit; Cape Coral-Fort Myers, Fla.; Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

Hispanics and blacks — traditionally solid Democratic constituencies — could be inclined to stay home in November if, as expected, the Census Bureau reports that many more of them were poor last year.
Experts say a jump in the poverty rate could mean that the liberal viewpoint — social constraints prevent the poor from working — will gain steam over the conservative position that the poor have opportunities to work but choose not to because they get too much help.
In 2008, the poverty level stood at $22,025 for a family of four, based on an official government calculation that includes only cash income before tax deductions. It excludes capital gains or accumulated wealth. It does not factor in noncash government aid such as tax credits or food stamps, which have surged to record levels in recent years under the federal stimulus program.
Beginning next year, the government plans to publish new, supplemental poverty figures that are expected to show even higher numbers of people in poverty than previously known. The figures will take into account rising costs of medical care, transportation and child care, a change analysts believe will add to the ranks of both seniors and working-age people in poverty.
H/t beloved fellows Steve, Igor, and Anon!
~Eowyn

Rate this post

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
The Reader Philip Ben Marston
Guest
The Reader Philip Ben Marston

One Huge factor is NAFTA, championed by ‘conservatives’ Gingrich, that has de-industrialized America, and most favored Nation Status to China, given by Nixon. From that point on, do you notice that b orrowing on the equity in your house was popularized, that continued the illusion of prosperity, until the mortgage bubble popped??? It is not just Obama, but all the NWO folks, conservative and leftist, that abandon commonweal for corporatism. And finally, it is all because of our sins, and the only antidote is for us to repent. Do you know that the sin of Sodom was prosperous ease and… Read more »

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Stabilized? So’s the Bismarck!

Dave from Atlanta
Guest
Dave from Atlanta

Today, Obama declared that his administration has “stopped the bleeding” and “stabilized the economy.” There seems to be an attitude in Washington these days that “perception is reality.” In otherwords, if politicians can get the public to buy into an idea, that idea becomes the perceived reality and the voting populace will proceed forward with their spending and hiring as if that perception were actually fact. I do not know where this belief originated, although some say that the American dollar’s value is based solely on the belief that it has value (since the abolishment of the strictly gold-backed financial… Read more »

igor
Guest
igor

nafta was championed and thrust on the idiot american public by bill clinton…. i read the above ap report on yahoo news saturday night and in monday and tuesdays print news (the news sun and sun times) they have bent the facts to blame the republicans and applaud obama.. amazing, the old russian propaganda rag tass would be ever so proud of the crap that msm shoves down the ignorant american throat…

GEIR SMITH
Guest
GEIR SMITH

coucou c’est moi le chevalier contre l’antechrist

stonepig
Guest
stonepig

It’s obvious to me that Obummer has failed us miserably. He walked into a job with a couple of wars. He walked into the mess Bush left. The economic problems DO go back to Reagan and Nixon, but slick Willy helped pass the bill that has driven millions of jobs overseas. But Obummer said he’d make the changes that would help and all he’s done is play in the big gold coin pond with all the other rich slobs. He was a shill for corporate America and now the truth is coming out. No one else would have done any… Read more »