Failure explained when it comes to Obamanomics

According to President Obama, “every economist who’s looked at it says that the Recovery Act has done its job.” The four economists gathered at the National Press Club on Tuesday were apparently not asked for their opinions on the matter.

Tuesday’s program, “Debt and Deficits: Implications for U.S. and Global Economic Recovery,” featured a panel of academics who addressed not only the unsustainable rate of spending but also legislative solutions to rein in the $13 trillion debt. Naturally, to remedy any situation, it is essential to understand the source of the problem.

That problem is ignoring the second half of the Keynesian model: Spending must be financed, and long-term financing results in rising debt. Veronique DeRugy, a Senior Research Fellow at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center, explains that “in Keynesian thought, a fall in economic demand causes a fall in spending.” A decrease in spending makes a nation poorer; thus when the government makes budget cuts, the result is job loss. That seems pretty uncontroversial, but Keynesians argue that government spending can take the place of private spending to revitalize demand and economic growth. So, does it work?

DeRugy cites a study by Harvard’s Robert Barro and Charles Redlick in which they analyze the effects of government spending on the overall economy, using defense spending as a proxy. Barro and Redlick concluded that one dollar of government spending results in a growth in GDP of 40–70 cents—a strong negative relationship between government size and economic growth. In other words, not a very savvy investment.

The ultimate test case for the Keynesian model, of course, is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which promised that 3.5 million private sector jobs would be created at a price of $787 billion. The President warned that if the stimulus were not signed into law, the country could face 8.8 percent unemployment.
One only needs the post-enactment facts in order to ascertain the success of the stimulus bill:

  • 862,000 jobs created at an average cost of $282,000 per public sector job and $647,000 per private sector job
  • Four of five jobs created are in the public sector
  • Government spending is not correlated to areas of high unemployment, and
  • The rate of unemployment has reached 9.3 percent after peaking at 10 percent.

The facts confirm the Barro and Redlick—and countless others’—research. The Keynesian model didn’t work in the case of the current recession, and even if one accepts the stimulus as an a priori good, it is unsustainable at its current rate. According to David Primo, associate professor at the University or Rochester, “Bailing out states rewards their bad behavior.” When states receive federal funds to sustain their spending habits, they are not forced to “face the music” and engage in budget reform. (Source: The Foundry)

These facts don’t lie. No matter what President Obama, Queen Nancy and Pelosi-puppet Steve Kagen claim, the stimulus was the ULTIMATE FAILURE!

Powered by ScribeFire.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Share

Advertisements

Gap in heathcare law

Well, well, well. How do you miss something like this in your cornerstone piece of legislation.

Hours after President Barack Obama signed historic health care legislation, a potential problem emerged. Administration officials are now scrambling to fix a gap in highly touted benefits for children.

Obama made better coverage for children a centerpiece of his health care remake, but it turns out the letter of the law provided a less-than-complete guarantee that kids with health problems would not be shut out of coverage.

Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.

However, if a child is accepted for coverage, or is already covered, the insurer cannot exclude payment for treating a particular illness, as sometimes happens now. For example, if a child has asthma, the insurance company cannot write a policy that excludes that condition from coverage. The new safeguard will be in place later this year.

Full protection for children would not come until 2014, said Kate Cyrul, a spokeswoman for the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, another panel that authored the legislation. That’s the same year when insurance companies could no longer deny coverage to any person on account of health problems.

Obama’s public statements have conveyed the impression that the new protections for kids were more sweeping and straightforward.

“This is a patient’s bill of rights on steroids,” the president said Friday at George Mason University in Virginia. “Starting this year, thousands of uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions will be able to purchase health insurance, some for the very first time. Starting this year, insurance companies will be banned forever from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.” (Source: Gap in health care law’s protection for children- AP)

Read the rest.

Guess that happens when you don’t read the bill before ramming it through against the will of the American people.  Right Congressman Kagen? Right Congressman Stupak? Right Congresswomen Pelosi?

Powered by ScribeFire.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]