Debt Debate in Congress

[Townsend]

What does the location of the call have anything to do with this?  Would it be better if the call was being made from his Crawford Ranch in Texas???

Nevermind that if he didn't many in Congress and the folks running agin' 'im would start screaming that he's trying to shut down the government.

[Hoss]

What does the location of the call have anything to do with this?  Would it be better if the call was being made from his Crawford Ranch in Texas???

I guess Scott forgets that our President was born in Hawaii.  And does have relatives there.

[Conan71]

I bet he will have it spent in less than 60 days after it's approved.

We have to pay for votes with tax cuts and unemployment checks, and we have to pay those out of Social Security, and we have to pay Social Security out of loans from China, and then we have to pay interest on the loans from China out of the loans themselves, and then when we run out we just raise the debt ceiling again.

Buy stuff on AMEX, pay AMEX with MasterCard, pay MasterCard with Visa, pay Visa with Discover. . .get a home equity loan to pay off Discover and charge more stuff on AMEX!  KEEP GOING! Imagine all the miles!  Fly around the world and play golf with campaign donors. Sling some stimulus cash to keep donors happy.  Deliver more unemployment checks.  Make Fanny and Freddy pull more cash from the poor and middle class trying to get mortgages. . .Shhhhh!  "Put the rest on my China Card!"  Jobs?  Jobs are for suckers. If it ain't public sector, it ain't $h!t!  

I see what you are doing there with all the golf references.  You are subtly pointing out the promise that President Obama made a couple of years back that he would not rest until unemployment was under control.  Well, for your information, he's not rested.  He's played a lot of golf in that time, hosted concerts at the White House, traveled abroad extensively, and generally lived the life of the celebrity he is.  I assure you that's not resting, that's well, uh, not resting, okay?  It's hard work being famous 'n stuff.

[Townsend]

I guess Scott forgets that our President was born in Hawaii.  And does have relatives there.

It's Hawaii though.  We aren't all in Hawaii so the anti-Obama crew will say "he's in Hawaii."

[Gaspar]

Ok, it's bad to criticize without offering reason.

RM, you are correct, it is necessary to spend in some areas to stabilize and soften the impact of cyclical recession, but that is only a small part of what the government can do.

In the past, or typical philosophy was to; encourage growth and investment by taking measures to decrease energy and production costs. increase spending in some areas, and cut spending on unessential programs, stimulate economic movement by making capital more available to encourage innovation and expansion, and suspend or eliminate regulations that check growth.  The perception of recovery was managed with realistic milestones, and uncertainty was minimized by the flow of capital.

We did very little of that, and every carrot offered was attacked to a giant stick.  Capital did not flow into the private sector where the jobs live. We got exactly what we purchased.  

The philosophy necessary for economic growth is very contrary to the philosophy of President Obama and most on the left, because it requires recognition that small businesses (and that means wealthy people) are where recession starts, and where it ends.  Their business decisions, positive and negative, are what makes the economy of this country ebb and flow.   It would also require recognition that innovation and expansion requires capital, and capital diverted for public sector growth diminishes private sector growth to an even greater measure because the public sector is not sustainable on its own.  

It's not to say that the Keynesian/Obama way returns NO positive results.  It does, but they are so very anemic that it is unwise to implement centralized economic philosophies during a recession if quick recovery is a goal.  I think ideals got in the way of reason.

[Gaspar]

I see what you are doing there with all the golf references.  You are subtly pointing out the promise that President Obama made a couple of years back that he would not rest until unemployment was under control.  Well, for your information, he's not rested.  He's played a lot of golf in that time, hosted concerts at the White House, traveled abroad extensively, and generally lived the life of the celebrity he is.  I assure you that's not resting, that's well, uh, not resting, okay?  It's hard work being famous 'n stuff.

No! I love golf, and I'm happy for him.  The hardest working man I know golfs all day, every day he can. . .my father!  He's retired and tries to play at least 20 or 30 times a year.

The president has a lot to be proud of.  He set a record yesterday!

Obama Golfs for the 90th Time as President
by KEITH KOFFLER on DECEMBER 26, 2011, 9:07 PM
After an hour of hiking, President Obama Monday got down to the serious business at hand, heading out to golf for the second day in his first three days of vacation. He was back on the course at Marine Corps Base Hawaii.

With this one, Obama reaches a new milestone, having gone golfing 90 times in less than three years as president. That's about three months of golf, given that the excursions generally take about five hours – much of the useful portion of the day.

What's more, it's the 32nd time he's been on the links this year, a record for the president. His 32 outings eclipses the 2010 mark of 30 and is far ahead of his 2009 tally of 28 rounds as president.

And remember, there are still five days left in the year for Obama to pad his new record, which he almost certainly will.

Along for Monday's round were three of Obama's Hawaii friends, Mike Ramos, Greg Orme and Bobby Titcomb. The latter, you may remember, was arrested in April in a prostitution sting.

[RecycleMichael]

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has reportedly played 119 rounds of golf in 2011 alone. With all the problems in the country and he is playing golf every three days.

Is gaspar upset about it?

If he was a democrat, gaspar would be typing in all caps and having a stroke.

Hypocrite.

[Red Arrow]

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has reportedly played 119 rounds of golf in 2011 alone. With all the problems in the country and he is playing golf every three days.

You should be happy he is playing golf instead of running the HOR.

I just wish Obama could keep up with him.

 

[RecycleMichael]

George Bush set the all-time record for vacation days as a President.

Bush spent 1,020 days of his presidency on vacation. To put this into context, John F. Kennedy spent fewer days in office, 1000, than George W. Bush spent on vacation. Bush spent 487 days at Camp David, 490 days at his Crawford ranch, and 43 days in Kennebunkport.

But 90 rounds of golf in three years by Obama...OMG!

Gaspar has written about Obama and his golf game dozens of times on TulsaNow alone. I wonder why it bothers him so, while George Bush being gone for more than a third of his Presidency never got a mention by gaspar.

Oh I forgot, Obama is a democrat.

[Conan71]

Ok, it's bad to criticize without offering reason.

RM, you are correct, it is necessary to spend in some areas to stabilize and soften the impact of cyclical recession, but that is only a small part of what the government can do.

In the past, or typical philosophy was to; encourage growth and investment by taking measures to decrease energy and production costs. increase spending in some areas, and cut spending on unessential programs, stimulate economic movement by making capital more available to encourage innovation and expansion, and suspend or eliminate regulations that check growth.  The perception of recovery was managed with realistic milestones, and uncertainty was minimized by the flow of capital.

We did very little of that, and every carrot offered was attacked to a giant stick.  Capital did not flow into the private sector where the jobs live. We got exactly what we purchased.  

The philosophy necessary for economic growth is very contrary to the philosophy of President Obama and most on the left, because it requires recognition that small businesses (and that means wealthy people) are where recession starts, and where it ends.  Their business decisions, positive and negative, are what makes the economy of this country ebb and flow.   It would also require recognition that innovation and expansion requires capital, and capital diverted for public sector growth diminishes private sector growth to an even greater measure because the public sector is not sustainable on its own.  

It's not to say that the Keynesian/Obama way returns NO positive results.  It does, but they are so very anemic that it is unwise to implement centralized economic philosophies during a recession if quick recovery is a goal.  I think ideals got in the way of reason.

In all fairness, let's take a larger look at what was driving the private sector during all the expansion leading up to the major cataclysm of '08 (or '07 depending on who's figures one cares to use to establish when the, ahem, second Bush recession began.)

To President Obama's credit, he was handed the biggest pile given a new U.S. President since FDR took office.  In many ways this was actually worse than what FDR faced because of a very complex modern financial system due to all the tools and gimmicks developed by degenerate gamblers who helped bring that system to its knees while getting fabulously wealthy with zero risk.  I wouldn't wish that on anyone, and I'm not really certain that John McCain could have achieved much more right now but at least we wouldn't have hurdles like Obamacare or "Doddering Funk" (Dodd-Frank for those of you who don't get my humor) which small business keeps identifying as one of the ways their plans for growth have been stifled.  

Unfortunately, President Obama seems overwhelmed and under-prepared to meet such a challenge.  His own defense and that of his supporters is to try and conflate figures to point out how he's no worse than his predecessors.  After eight years of George W. Bush, that's a really low bar.  Trying to conflate by percentages how $5 trillion in new debt over three years is somehow less harmful than $69 billion over eight years is really tortured logic, but that's how Obama's sycophants roll though.  Sully up the predecessors so he doesn't look quite so incompetent or reckless, that's usually the first line of defense in defending overwhelming incompetence.

He brought with him a cadre of idealistic advisors who shared his vision for the country.  In better economic times, they might be viewed with great success and be heading for an easy re-election while the economy keeps motoring along.  Had unemployment stayed around 5% and had there not been a complete collapse of the financial system, I believe many of his initiatives would have gone largely un-noticed and with little complaint.  Well, that's not entirely true, but his policies might have been looked upon with the same lens Clinton's policies were looked at.  In spite of every attempt of the conservative talking heads to claim otherwise, Clinton was very business-friendly.  Well, aside from what that whole NAFTA thing he left us with, but apparently, even the globalist neo-cons were on board with it.

One thing President Reagan did which was a proven success for previous presidents was increased defense spending.  He had the advantage of doing that at a time when we had no major engagements anywhere in the world.  That spending helped bring advances in technology sectors which have come to the consumer level now with things like GPS, advanced composites, nano-technology, etc. ad nauseum.  The space program, specifically the shuttle program was also a boon for many high paying jobs both in the government and with many contractors.  He also reaped the benefit of the burgeoning PC market, networking technology, and great advances in telecommunications, including cell phones, which was gaining ground throughout his term.  In 1980, it was unusual to see a computer terminal on virtually every desk in any business you might frequent.  By 1990, it was unusual to not see a terminal on a desk.  

Presidents Bush and Clinton also reaped continued growth in those markets plus Clinton got the benefit of robust growth with telecom, the internet, and bio-tech, as well as how much capital came into play via the big rage in IPO's in the late 1990's thanks to relaxed regulations.

Again, to President Obama's credit, he's not had an explosive growth industry under his watch.  That's not his fault.  If the next integrated circuit, home PC, cell phone, or widget were coming through the pipeline, there would be plenty of money chasing it and plenty of jobs to follow.  Instead of really following a winner and helping to fund it, he tried to create a winner by funding business models which made no sense, offered no real innovation, and were even duplicitous to what is already available or even behind what the current state-of-the art is.  It's very well-documented now that there were some great PR coups and photo-ops in supporting incredibly high-risks simply because they represented a technology his supporters wanted to see.

President Obama fell prey to the idea that green jobs represented the next great technological breakthrough and has gambled heavily on it, ostensibly at the urging of significant campaign donors who stood to gain from enthusiastic government support and money.  In reality, most all the "green" technologies have existed for decades, if not centuries or millennia.  Old research has simply been re-packaged with modest gains in production and plenty of hyperbole and fear tactics like "global warming".  The human race has harvested the various energies in different ways over time.  There have really been no major breakthroughs in the last 20-30 years in alt fuels or kinetic or radiant energy like hydro, wind, or solar energy.  Bio-fuels and syn-fuels are also not anything new and have been exposed as having too high an energy requirement to create them. I suspect green jobs may be his Waterloo.  The unfortunate reality is that this administration is investing far too much hope in really old technology.  If they spent money on real research instead of regurgitated older technology which has an economic disadvantage to foreign competition, they would not now be such a laughingstock in the international community.  

From my perspective, it's not changed my job one iota, but I know my boss intends to keep our company leaner than we used to run it when I came
on board seven years ago.  He might hate Obama personally, might be paranoid, or might just be like millions of other small business owners who have been frightened to their core over the last five years and want to stay in business to feed their families and have something of value when they retire rather than employ people for altruistic means, I'm not sure.  We've endured a lot but to be perfectly honest, we are the busiest I've seen the business since I signed on in Oct. of '04.  Instead of splitting out load amongst a bigger work force, my boss has raised the remuneration for contribution.  We all work a little harder, but I don't hear anyone complain when the profit sharing checks come every quarter.  As of Friday I will have had my best single year earnings in a 25+ year career in sales.  Two years ago, I couldn't say the same thing as I endured a 30% cut in pay.

Interestingly, my company made a lot of money selling equipment to bio fuel companies and natural gas compressor plants from '05 to mid '08.  That business has not even tried to rebound.  There are still many dealers with brand-new circa 2008 shrink-wrapped expellers, fermenters, boilers, etc. sitting in their warehouses and back lots.  The only reason we are even in business these days are the traditional sectors like petroleum exploration and refining, petrochemical, and agricultural have been really going great guns.  We also seem to have hit a lucky cycle on government facilities and private industry alike where they finally maxed out the life-span of old equipment and have no alternative but to buy new equipment for reasons of safety and efficiency.

I also did really well under Clinton.  It has nothing to do with which ever president brought me the greatest gains.  They didn't do it.  I did it in spite of whatever paradigms are out there.  I've always felt like if I buy into "the economy sucks" I will fail personally.

If I were Obama, I'd invest in improving our petroleum exploration, delivery, and refining capacity even though that seems wildly unpopular amongst his supporters.  I'd permit 10 or so major regional refineries with the latest technology in efficiency and emissions, and co-locate ethanol and bio-diesel refining on the same plots of land, using the many different sources of waste heat you can find on a refinery.  Drive past Holly's two refineries on any given day and you will see steam, a flare, or the heat signature of a hot gas escaping to the atmosphere.  There are BTU's in all that waste which would decrease the amount of new energy required to refine green fuels.  building 10 mega refineries and updating the distribution network would easily create hundreds of thousands of construction jobs over the next decade in addition to all the ancillary jobs that would lead to and long-term employment within the refineries.

That would accomplish many means including driving down oil prices which would allow the consumer economy to rebound.  I suspect there are several million jobs that no longer exist which might exist if gasoline were $2.25 and diesel was consistently less than $3.00.

[Conan71]

George Bush set the all-time record for vacation days as a President.

Bush spent 1,020 days of his presidency on vacation. To put this into context, John F. Kennedy spent fewer days in office, 1000, than George W. Bush spent on vacation. Bush spent 487 days at Camp David, 490 days at his Crawford ranch, and 43 days in Kennebunkport.

But 90 rounds of golf in three years by Obama...OMG!

Gaspar has written about Obama and his golf game dozens of times on TulsaNow alone. I wonder why it bothers him so, while George Bush being gone for more than a third of his Presidency never got a mention by gaspar.

Oh I forgot, Obama is a democrat.

This has become one of the dumbest straw men of the last few years.  I suspect President Obama does spend time getting briefings every day, and abdicating delegating responsibility to others including Christmas no matter where he is.  And if I had his job, I would have been on the links more than 90 times in three years.  I'd probably also be on my third trip to rehab by now, but that's a different story.  

I don't recall President Bush regaling all sorts of gadflies and political supporters on the public dime at the ranch in Crawford or requiring two or three aircraft at $100,000 per hour to get to Crawford or Camp David.  Just like President Reagan's ranch in California, both presidents were well-reputed to have working vacations, spending much time at their personal retreats working on the nation's business where they could be outside the pressures and negative influences of the beltway and have positive ways to unwind.  Other presidents have chosen their own homestead for a get-away from the pressure of such a stressful job by clearing land or chopping wood amongst a day of conducting the nation's business.  That's an old tradition dating to the days of George Washington.  Also sounds better than playing golf with donors.

Where Obama has failed in terms of PR is that he seems really disconnected and distant from what is happening in the lives of the 20% of unemployed in the U.S. and even more disconnected from the other 20% or so of "working poor" when he and his wife take separate jumbo jets to Martha's Vineyard, Oahu, Spain, or the Far East to stay at some fabulous estate.  There's a palpable arrogance that you don't get from a president pictured on his horse on a hill side at Camp David, his mountain bike in Crawford, Texas, or with an axe in his hand at a remote ranch near Santa Barbara, or even at the family compound at Cape Cod or Kennebunktport.  A tumbleweed and mesquite-infested ranch in the middle of some God-forsaken part of Texas doesn't represent a slice of paradise to most people so 400 some days there is hardly a "vacation" in the eyes of the public compared to two weeks at a borrowed estate in Oahu.  

I agree, it's pretty sophomoric to consistently lambaste this president for his vacation choices, but he really makes himself an easy target because he's got this indifference like he's a celebrity and not the leader of a nation which is in great turmoil.  Sure, he's more than welcome to conduct business where he sees fit and to play as many rounds of golf as he likes.  Just seems like in times like these, he might want to keep the image toned down by staying at Camp David or publicly trumpeting out how he's cutting the White House travel budget by spending Christmas vacation in Wichita tracking down the roots from his mother's side of the family.  Contrary to popular belief, there is no ancestral Obama family compound on Oahu like there was on Cape Cod for President Kennedy.

All that said, I'd love to see a comparison of travel budgets for the last four or five presidents and I think we might all be shocked by the results.

Oh, and Boehner and all his golf?  The GOP leadership needs to remove him from SOTH after 2012 if not sooner.  He's a complete donkey, maybe even worse than Gingrich.  Sure a lot of business can be done on the golf course, but this guy wouldn't understand a compromise if it came wrapped in a shelf bra and crotchless panties  

[Gaspar]

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner has reportedly played 119 rounds of golf in 2011 alone. With all the problems in the country and he is playing golf every three days.

Is gaspar upset about it?

If he was a democrat, gaspar would be typing in all caps and having a stroke.

Hypocrite.

What makes you think I'm upset about either?

The less time congress and the president spend making laws, and ending money the better!

Besides, Boehner only has a part-time job working as a member of the house.  Great way to spend that extra time before he retires.

So, back to the president. . . How long do you think 1.2 trillion will last him?

[Townsend]

So, back to the president. . . How long do you think 1.2 trillion will last him medicare/medicaid/military/foreign aid/congressional pork?

[JCnOwasso]

I don't recall President Bush regaling all sorts of gadflies and political supporters on the public dime at the ranch in Crawford or requiring two or three aircraft at $100,000 per hour to get to Crawford or Camp David.  

It has been estimated that Bush's trips to Crawford totalled about 20million in flight time alone, I am not even sure of the costs to get back and forth to camp david.  This does not include the costs of the "working vacation" aspects like, flights for the entire cabinet staff etc.  The $4M estimate for the Hawaii trip for the Obama's is for EVERYTHING. 

 

[Gaspar]

Hey, I'm good with that too!  We had the opportunity to turn things around with Erskine Bowles' and the president's super committee recommendations.  In fact, President Obama hand picked the members of the Super Committee and demanded that they provide a solution.  He gave them a solid deadline and recognized and pontificated that the recommendations of the Committee might be "painful" but necessary in stabilizing our economy, reducing debt, and creating jobs.

We still never got a reason from the president as to why he ignored the committee's "Moment of Truth" report.  Not a word was said, it was just quietly slid to the side of the Resolute Desk, where i'm sure it still sits today over a year later.  We had an opportunity to choose the blue line, but we went with the green line.  No explanations.   No reasons.  Just a quiet decision to slouch forward blindly.

http://momentoftruthproject.org/sites/default/files/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf