Mar 4 04:13 AM US/Eastern
By MIKE ECKEL
Associated Press Writer
MOSCOW (AP) - If you're inclined to believe Igor Panarin, and the Kremlin wouldn't mind if you did, then President Barack Obama will order martial law this year, the U.S. will split into six rump-states before 2011, and Russia and China will become the backbones of a new world order.
Panarin might be easy to ignore but for the fact that he is a dean at the Foreign Ministry's school for future diplomats and a regular on Russia's state-guided TV channels. And his predictions fit into the anti-American story line of the Kremlin leadership.
"There is a high probability that the collapse of the United States will occur by 2010," Panarin told dozens of students, professors and diplomats Tuesday at the Diplomatic Academy—a lecture the ministry pointedly invited The Associated Press and other foreign media to attend.
The prediction from Panarin, a former spokesman for Russia's Federal Space Agency and reportedly an ex-KGB analyst, meshes with the negative view of the U.S. that has been flowing from the Kremlin in recent years, in particular from Vladimir Putin.
Putin, the former president who is now prime minister, has likened the United States to Nazi Germany's Third Reich and blames Washington for the global financial crisis that has pounded the Russian economy.
Panarin didn't give many specifics on what underlies his analysis, mostly citing newspapers, magazines and other open sources.
He also noted he had been predicting the demise of the world's wealthiest country for more than a decade now.
But he said the recent economic turmoil in the U.S. and other "social and cultural phenomena" led him to nail down a specific timeframe for "The End"—when the United States will break up into six autonomous regions and Alaska will revert to Russian control.
Panarin argued that Americans are in moral decline, saying their great psychological stress is evident from school shootings, the size of the prison population and the number of gay men.
Turning to economic woes, he cited the slide in major stock indexes, the decline in U.S. gross domestic product and Washington's bailout of banking giant Citigroup as evidence that American dominance of global markets has collapsed.
"I was there recently and things are far from good," he said. "What's happened is the collapse of the American dream."
Panarin insisted he didn't wish for a U.S. collapse, but he predicted Russia and China would emerge from the economic turmoil stronger and said the two nations should work together, even to create a new currency to replace the U.S. dollar.
Asked for comment on how the Foreign Ministry views Panarin's theories, a spokesman said all questions had to be submitted in writing and no answers were likely before Wednesday.
It wasn't clear how persuasive the 20-minute lecture was. One instructor asked Panarin whether his predictions more accurately describe Russia, which is undergoing its worst economic crisis in a decade as well as a demographic collapse that has led some scholars to predict the country's demise.
Panarin dismissed that idea: "The collapse of Russia will not occur."
But Alexei Malashenko, a scholar-in-residence at the Carnegie Moscow Center who did not attend the lecture, sided with the skeptical instructor, saying Russia is the country that is on the verge of disintegration.
"I can't imagine at all how the United States could ever fall apart," Malashenko told the AP.
Verse:
John 3:16; Jn 3:16; John 3
Keyword:
Salvation, Jesus, Gospel
With Operators:
AND, OR, NOT, “ â€
Showing posts with label Unemployment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Unemployment. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
California to begin layoff proceedings today
By JUDY LIN – 19 hours ago
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — After a frustrating holiday weekend that failed to yield the one vote needed to end California's budget stalemate, the state is poised to begin layoff proceedings Tuesday for 20,000 government workers.
In addition to the layoffs, the state also plans to halt all remaining public works projects, potentially putting thousands of construction workers out of jobs.
"We are dealing with a catastrophe of unbelievable proportions," said state Sen. Alan Lowenthal, a Democrat from Long Beach and chairman of the Senate transportation committee.
Senate leader Darrell Steinberg announced late Monday that lawmakers had failed to find the final vote in his chamber as Republicans refused to support tax increases. He called a session for Tuesday and said he would put the tax provisions of the budget proposal up for a vote, even if they would not pass.
Steinberg warned lawmakers to bring their toothbrushes, saying they would not leave until that vote was secured.
"One member," Steinberg said. "One more member to put the interest of the state ahead of ideology and ahead of any parochial concern."
Like other states, California faces plunging tax revenue that has imperiled state services. The proposal put before lawmakers this weekend was negotiated by Schwarzenegger and the four legislative leaders and appeared to have support of the required two-thirds majority in the state Assembly.
However, it was falling one Republican vote short in the Senate, a situation that had not changed throughout a weekend marked by long hours and uncertainty over the state's future.
The plan includes $15.1 billion in program cuts, $14.4 billion in temporary tax increases and $11.4 billion in borrowing. The package also would send five ballot measures to voters in a special election to be held May 19.
The stalled effort prompted Schwarzenegger to make good on an earlier promise to begin the layoff process for thousands of state workers.
The governor had delayed releasing the notices on Friday when it appeared lawmakers would pass a compromise plan to close the state's $42 billion shortfall. But with marathon weekend sessions failing to produce the necessary votes, Schwarzenegger's spokesman said the administration had no choice.
"In the absence of a budget, the governor must do everything he can to cut back on state spending," spokesman Aaron McLear said.
The notices will start going out Tuesday to 20,000 workers in corrections, health and human services and other agencies that receive money from the general fund. Administration officials are seeking to eliminate up to 10,000 jobs as part of the governor's order to cut 10 percent from the government payroll.
Despite the warnings of impending fiscal calamity, most rank-and-file Republicans have refused to agree to higher taxes. Republican lawmakers blamed Democrats for years of overspending.
"You're not going to go back to the people's pocketbooks to fuel that spending," said state Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Temecula.
During a lively floor session Monday night, state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, defended his colleagues' stance against tax hikes and said his constituents were pleading with him to vote no on the budget proposal.
He accused Democrats, who hold majorities in both houses, of using the recession to drive an agenda of tax increases.
"You want this emergency," Runner said, drawing jeers from Democrats in the chamber. "Listen, you may not like to hear what we have to say, but it's what we believe."
Steinberg, the Senate president pro tem, acknowledged that tax increases were difficult for all lawmakers to swallow but said the Legislature had no choice.
"Nobody likes that idea, but remember the reason we are in this crisis is because we are in a national and international crisis," he said.
Lawmakers broke the record for longest legislative session in state history over the weekend before disbanding Sunday night. The Assembly was at one point in session for 30 hours.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — After a frustrating holiday weekend that failed to yield the one vote needed to end California's budget stalemate, the state is poised to begin layoff proceedings Tuesday for 20,000 government workers.
In addition to the layoffs, the state also plans to halt all remaining public works projects, potentially putting thousands of construction workers out of jobs.
"We are dealing with a catastrophe of unbelievable proportions," said state Sen. Alan Lowenthal, a Democrat from Long Beach and chairman of the Senate transportation committee.
Senate leader Darrell Steinberg announced late Monday that lawmakers had failed to find the final vote in his chamber as Republicans refused to support tax increases. He called a session for Tuesday and said he would put the tax provisions of the budget proposal up for a vote, even if they would not pass.
Steinberg warned lawmakers to bring their toothbrushes, saying they would not leave until that vote was secured.
"One member," Steinberg said. "One more member to put the interest of the state ahead of ideology and ahead of any parochial concern."
Like other states, California faces plunging tax revenue that has imperiled state services. The proposal put before lawmakers this weekend was negotiated by Schwarzenegger and the four legislative leaders and appeared to have support of the required two-thirds majority in the state Assembly.
However, it was falling one Republican vote short in the Senate, a situation that had not changed throughout a weekend marked by long hours and uncertainty over the state's future.
The plan includes $15.1 billion in program cuts, $14.4 billion in temporary tax increases and $11.4 billion in borrowing. The package also would send five ballot measures to voters in a special election to be held May 19.
The stalled effort prompted Schwarzenegger to make good on an earlier promise to begin the layoff process for thousands of state workers.
The governor had delayed releasing the notices on Friday when it appeared lawmakers would pass a compromise plan to close the state's $42 billion shortfall. But with marathon weekend sessions failing to produce the necessary votes, Schwarzenegger's spokesman said the administration had no choice.
"In the absence of a budget, the governor must do everything he can to cut back on state spending," spokesman Aaron McLear said.
The notices will start going out Tuesday to 20,000 workers in corrections, health and human services and other agencies that receive money from the general fund. Administration officials are seeking to eliminate up to 10,000 jobs as part of the governor's order to cut 10 percent from the government payroll.
Despite the warnings of impending fiscal calamity, most rank-and-file Republicans have refused to agree to higher taxes. Republican lawmakers blamed Democrats for years of overspending.
"You're not going to go back to the people's pocketbooks to fuel that spending," said state Sen. Dennis Hollingsworth, R-Temecula.
During a lively floor session Monday night, state Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, defended his colleagues' stance against tax hikes and said his constituents were pleading with him to vote no on the budget proposal.
He accused Democrats, who hold majorities in both houses, of using the recession to drive an agenda of tax increases.
"You want this emergency," Runner said, drawing jeers from Democrats in the chamber. "Listen, you may not like to hear what we have to say, but it's what we believe."
Steinberg, the Senate president pro tem, acknowledged that tax increases were difficult for all lawmakers to swallow but said the Legislature had no choice.
"Nobody likes that idea, but remember the reason we are in this crisis is because we are in a national and international crisis," he said.
Lawmakers broke the record for longest legislative session in state history over the weekend before disbanding Sunday night. The Assembly was at one point in session for 30 hours.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Obama Hails Stimulus Passage as 'Major Milestone'
By Michael D. Shear
CHICAGO -- President Obama today called congressional passage of his stimulus plan "a major milestone" in efforts to turn around the nation's economy, and he said he would soon sign the massive legislation into law.
The comments, in his weekly Internet and radio address, came just hours after a late-night vote in the Senate gave final approval to the $787 billion spending and tax cut plan.
In the address, Obama said the plan would "ignite spending" in the country, and he praised the members of Congress -- almost exclusively Democrats -- who "came together in common purpose to make it happen."
He also promised skeptical listeners that the government's poor track record of wasting money would not be repeated this time.
"Our goal must be to spend these precious dollars with unprecedented accountability, responsibility, and transparency," he said.
"Once the plan is put into action, a new Web site -- recovery.gov -- will allow any American to watch where the money goes and weigh in with comments and questions. And I encourage every American to do so," he said. "Ultimately, this is your money, and you deserve to know where it's going and how it's spent."
The president warned that the stimulus package, one of the largest spending plans ever passed by Congress, was only part of what will be necessary to right the economy.
He said the weeks to come will require efforts to fix the banking system, get the housing industry back on its feet and reform regulatory structures that failed to catch the problems in the first place.
He also promised to submit a budget later this month that will "begin to restore the discipline these challenging times demand."
He said deficit spending is necessary to jump-start the economy. But he said that the country's "long-term" goal must be to tame the deficit.
"Our long-term economic growth demands that we tame our burgeoning federal deficit; that we invest in the things we need, and dispense with the things we don't," he said.
After weeks of sobering, even depressing speeches, Obama's address ended on a hopeful note, quoting former president John F. Kennedy, who said, "Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men. Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers. Pray for powers equal to your tasks."
Obama said: "America, we will prove equal to this task. It will take time, and it will take effort, but working together, we will turn this crisis into opportunity and emerge from our painful present into a brighter future. After a week spent with the fundamentally decent men and women of this nation, I have never been more certain of that."
CHICAGO -- President Obama today called congressional passage of his stimulus plan "a major milestone" in efforts to turn around the nation's economy, and he said he would soon sign the massive legislation into law.
The comments, in his weekly Internet and radio address, came just hours after a late-night vote in the Senate gave final approval to the $787 billion spending and tax cut plan.
In the address, Obama said the plan would "ignite spending" in the country, and he praised the members of Congress -- almost exclusively Democrats -- who "came together in common purpose to make it happen."
He also promised skeptical listeners that the government's poor track record of wasting money would not be repeated this time.
"Our goal must be to spend these precious dollars with unprecedented accountability, responsibility, and transparency," he said.
"Once the plan is put into action, a new Web site -- recovery.gov -- will allow any American to watch where the money goes and weigh in with comments and questions. And I encourage every American to do so," he said. "Ultimately, this is your money, and you deserve to know where it's going and how it's spent."
The president warned that the stimulus package, one of the largest spending plans ever passed by Congress, was only part of what will be necessary to right the economy.
He said the weeks to come will require efforts to fix the banking system, get the housing industry back on its feet and reform regulatory structures that failed to catch the problems in the first place.
He also promised to submit a budget later this month that will "begin to restore the discipline these challenging times demand."
He said deficit spending is necessary to jump-start the economy. But he said that the country's "long-term" goal must be to tame the deficit.
"Our long-term economic growth demands that we tame our burgeoning federal deficit; that we invest in the things we need, and dispense with the things we don't," he said.
After weeks of sobering, even depressing speeches, Obama's address ended on a hopeful note, quoting former president John F. Kennedy, who said, "Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men. Do not pray for tasks equal to your powers. Pray for powers equal to your tasks."
Obama said: "America, we will prove equal to this task. It will take time, and it will take effort, but working together, we will turn this crisis into opportunity and emerge from our painful present into a brighter future. After a week spent with the fundamentally decent men and women of this nation, I have never been more certain of that."
Thursday, February 12, 2009
'Obamaland' Author Predicts Obama Will Spend America Into Another Depression
Posted 02/12/2009 ET
HUMAN EVENTS editor Jed Babbin's exclusive interview with James Delingpole, author of “Welcome to Obamaland: I Have Seen Your Future and it Doesn’t Work”:
Jed Babbin: James Delingpole: You claim to have seen America’s future because Britain is living it. What do you predict for us under Obama’s administration?
James Delingpole: Because it’s easy to see his path to spend America into another depression. And don’t forget: Your Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, wondered aloud why they call it “the Great Depression.” She mused that it wasn’t so great. But that’s where you’re headed.
JB: Why?
JD: They’ve got an agenda that can only be described as a smorgasbord of expense and misery. Higher taxes. Number two, aruinously expensive, ever-expanding, ever-worsening universal heath care system. I predict increased government interference in areas of your life where you might feel that government has no darned right to interfere. For example, things like your freedom to hunt, how you look after your pets -- even rules governing how you dispose of your trash. You might even have spy cameras in your trash cans like we do in England.
JB: Whoa, whoa -- spy cameras in your trashcans?
JD: Yeah, sounds crazy but it’s true. We now have places where you have spy cameras in your trashcans to find out whether you are disposing of your rubbish in an ecologically-sound way or not. This is happening in England now. Then there are rules governing how much you eat, how much you drink. Actually, just out of interest, this is one of the many unpleasant side effects of a state health care system. The state believes that given that it is so generously providing you with medicine it therefore ought to take control of your body: what kind of food you eat, whether or not your smoke. Something similar applied in Nazi Germany.
JB: Let’s go right to health care. We are promised a health care system that is going to take better care of us. It’s going to bring cost down. Well, ... that’s what they’re promising. Didn’t Mr. Blair promise that too?
JD: Oh my goodness. Do you know how much our National Health Service costs in Britain?
JB: No idea.
JD: 95 billion pounds. That is about 20 billion pounds more than we spend on education. That’s about three times our defense budget. It is the single biggest government department of all.
JB: But now, that pays for everything, right? I mean, it pays everybody’s medical costs everything.
JD: Well, that’s the theory. Free universal health care at the point of need. The problem is, I think something like 60 % of doctors do not use the system. We have the lowest cancer survival rates of any, any G-8 nation. The more we pumped into our health care system, the worst it seems to have got. All that money has gone into layers of administration. Our National Health Service, I believe, is the world’s third biggest employer after the Chinese army and the Indian state railways. It’s maybe the envy of the third world, but with all the health tourists we get coming to sponge off our system. But if you’re a taxpayer who has to use this system, it’s, it’s a joke, and, if Obama’s talking about it costing you between 50 billion and 65 billion dollars…
JB: Right.
JD: If it costs anything less than a ten times that, I’m a banana. It’ll be ruinous. And, get this: once you’ve started it, it will never stop. It will suck up more, and more, and more of your money. Whichever administration comes in in eight years time to replace -- yes, I’m afraid it will be eight years -- to replace Obama, they aren’t going to be able to shut off the faucets that easily.
JB: But the issue of education: liberals are always telling us that everything they do is “for the children.” And President Obama wants a big part of his so-called “economic stimulus” bill for school construction. Is that what worries you?
JD: No, not entirely. The spending is only half the problem. With Obama and other entirely dedicated liberals, you get elitism. Excellence, and traditional learning will be replaced by touchy-feely, esteem-boosting, non-competitiveness. You’ll see old-fashioned subjects being hijacked as a way of advancing the left liberal agenda. For example, geography will no longer be about rivers, and capitals, and borders -- physical geography. It will be about feeling guilty about global warming and why it’s all our fault. History will become about -- not about the greatness of Jefferson and Washington, it will be about feeling guilty for the slave trade.
You will also see in the name of multiculturalism still further surrenders to the aggression of Islam. You will see more affirmative action programs, which of course are supposed to make things fairer but will inevitably make things less fair and create greater social resentment and greater social injustice. You will see further unsustainable immigration, both legal and illegal, but what you will not see is the assimilation that America so desperately needs if immigration is ever gonna work. You’ll see further division of America into Spanish speaking and English speaking parts, because nobody can be bothered to insist that, that immigrants learn English as they should.
JB: Now you claim to be able to see into the future for America. Why do you think Mr. Obama is going to do to England, do to America rather, what Mr. Blair did to England?
JD: Because I think they come from the same mold. For a start, they’re both ex-lawyers and they are people of the liberal left. When the English electorate, British electorate, voted in Tony Blair in 1997, I think a lot of them thought they were getting something else. A bit like people in America now see Obama as this wonderful all-purpose solution to all their problems . When Blair started talking about this wonderful thing called “the Third Way,” people really were gullible enough to believe in this emperor's new clothes, which is what it was. Blair gave this impression that he had this wonderful new idea where you could have on the one hand a fully functioning capitalist system with healthy economy and on the other hand social justice. And he would achieve this through a magical process of triangulation.
JB: Let me stop you right there. That sounds an awful lot to me like the promise of hope and change.
JD: Yea absolutely, the audacity of hope. Can I just say that hope is not an audacious thing, hope is a desperate thing. It should have been called the Desperation of Hope.
JB: Mr. Obama clearly revealed himself through Joe the Plumber with that remark about wanting to redistribute wealth. What did Mr. Blair do? Did he go about redistributing the wealth of England?
JD: Yes, he did it. As I’m sure you know he has a nasty henchmen called Gordon Brown, who was his chancellor of the exchequer
JB: And is now the prime minister.
JD: Gordon Brown is much more obviously left wing than Tony Blair, much more avowedly left wing -- he’s an old school socialist. And in order to disguise the socialist nature of the government, what they did was introduce these stealth taxes. The first thing, the first major policy move that Gordon Brown made was he gave independence to the Bank of England to set interest rates and people decided to interpret this as a sign of bi-partisan, pragmatic, business-friendly, market-savvy government. And it fooled a lot of right wing commentators, It gave Brown a false reputation for fiscal responsibility which effectively gave him pretty much a free pass over the next few years to drift as leftward as he liked. He did this very sneakily, mind you, in the form of “stealth taxes”
Rather than bump up income tax by 5%, which is effectively what you did in taxation terms, instead he hid these taxes in other forms he started taxing pensions started taxing the pension funds so that the public the public didn’t see these very complicated financial instruments. Americans should expect this same sort of stealthy taxation,.
JB: Didn’t Mr. Blair also sort of tilt British politics toward the green side? He was trying to make everything eco-friendly?
JD: Yes, he did, but that came later on in his regime. I think that whole green thing really is a phenomenon of the last 5 or 6 years rather than the first 5 years of Blair’s regime. I mean, he was in office about 10 years.
JB: So we have an issue of raising taxes, redistributing wealth going to the global warming whacko side.
JD: Yeah, I don’t think Americas realize, preoccupied as they are with their own economic woes, just how badly screwed the English economy is of all the G-8 nations (the IMF has told us this [is] the one officially least likely to come out of the recession any time soon). And the reason for that is we have just enjoyed a period of the most extreme tax and spend socialism.
We’ve been spending money that we don’t have. One of the worst things that Gordon Brown did was sell our gold reserves in order to fund this spending spree. He sold them at about a quarter of the price, I think. When he sold, it was about 200 dollars an ounce and it's now about $850 an ounce -- aquarter of the price, and then he went crazy with the money -- our money -- like it was his money and he’d just won the Lottery. And now of course he can't keep to his spending plans because he’s not getting the tax income because the economy is shrinking.
JB: In terms of some of the other things you see coming from Mr. Obama, I mean, I’m wondering if things like restrictions on political speech and free speech have come about in England and how they work. We’re looking down the gun barrel of this so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”
JD: One of the things that delighted me in coming to America is realizing how much more freely I can speak my mind over here than I can in England. This is partly of course because I’ve been talking to some good old right wing talk shows. I felt very much at home there. But it's mainly, I think, because there are various forms of censorship in Britain ranging from direct censorship -- for example we have new laws circumscribing what they call hate speech which is basically a euphemism for any criticism of Islam whatsoever.
There are new rules actually telling comedians the sort of jokes they're allowed to tell. You are not allowed to tell jokes about religion anymore. But it’s not religion in general. You know people have been mocking Christianity for years -- look at Monty Python’s “Life of Brian,” a very funny film that is still legal. But when it comes to the “religion of peace,” people start getting uncomfortable.
Without ever acknowledging it, our government has introduced this two-tiered legal system where there’s one rule for everyone else and another special one for the Muslims in case they get upset about anything. This is the direct form of censorship I mentioned. Then there’s indirect censorship in the form of what you might call self-censorship.
The sort of views I’m expressing in America I wouldn’t feel very comfortable on British radio.
JB: Well in terms of that, one question about the BBC itself. I mean, it seems to me that that’s part of what the American Revolution was about. Taxation without representation. Conservatives can’t get an equal voice on BBC, but everybody pays the BBC tax, right?
JD: Yes, just digressing for a second. You might make the same point about Europe. Europe is a classic example of taxation without representation. 80% of all our new laws in Britain -- 80%! -- we have no control over. They come direct from the EU and are rubber stamped by their amen corner in the British left liberal government. But, sorry, to go back to your point about the BBC, yea its absolutely true. Dear old BBC, they try, they want to be neutral, but the problem is because everyone that they employ is recruited through a left wing newspaper called The Guardian, which is where they run all their media recruitment ads, their idea of neutrality, in the center of the road, is what anyone else would call quite far left. So what do you do? As a right-winger, I’m sometimes wheeled on as the sort of freak to scare the babies and the grandmothers. I’m the comic turn.
JB: Well we see some of these things coming, and I don’t know that we can see that in America’s future. Do you think were in that much danger of this sort of thing?
JD: Yes.
JB: Why?
JD: Well, because of The Fairness Doctrine I see it happening. Look, America may try and delude itself that it has always been a land of free speech and the center ground and common sense. And you talk to any of my left liberal friends, and they would tell you that, but look at Woodrow Wilson. Look at FDR. Look at what Kennedy would have done if he’d lived. Look at Lyndon Johnson. These were all what Jonah Goldberg would call approximations of liberal fascist dictatorships.
JD: Can I give you one example which is kowtowing to the Green lobby? I cannot understand how, as the world approaches its greatest depression since the 1930s, how President Obama can talk about nailing his clothes to the mast of this whacko ideology which was developed during a time of economic plenty by krypto communists who joined the green movement because they needed a new base from which to destroy the capitalist system after the Berlin Wall came down. Does he really imagine that imposing carbon taxes on U.S. industry is going to help your economy in its direst hour of need?
JB: Now you’ve tried that already in Britain, haven’t you?
JD: Yes, we have, and, let me tell you, it hasn’t just affected us negatively in our economy, it has also affected our energy security by lessening it.
JB: And jobs, I suspect.
JD: And jobs too, yes. Because the Green Lobby has so bullied successive governments, but particularly this left liberal one, into ducking the issue of nuclear power. Nobody has plucked up the courage to say we need to generate power, nuclear power, we must build nuclear power stations. It takes about 10 years to build a nuclear power station. The result of this is that we are reliant on Russia for our gas supplies. We got rid of most of our coal because of the battle that Margaret Thatcher fought with the unions in the 1980s. We have no nuclear power. But our Labour government has committed us to following the impossible carbon-reduction agenda of the bullying EU into building all these wind farms which don’t work when it’s not windy enough and don’t work when it’s too windy. All they do really is ruin the countryside. Which is kind of weird when you think that environmentalists are supposed to love nature.
JB: Parallel to all the green stuff that we hear from Mr. Obama, I see in England something that is really much as dark and probably as restrictive of personal freedom. I’m not sure its quite as much effect on the economy. We have a very large and very active hunting and shooting community here. Now Britain has already banned fox hunting, and the Countryside Alliance folks are telling me well the next thing they’re going to do is ban shooting. Where is this coming from? Do you see roots of this here in America?
JD: Well you’ve got PETA as we’ve got PETA. The problem with the animal rights lobby is give them an inch, and they’ll take a mile. First of all, fox hunting goes, then they start coming after the shooters, next it’ll be the fishermen. They’re never satisfied. Once you believe animals have rights, what does PETA call fish now? Is it sea kittens?
JB: Sea kittens?
JB: Is this ban on fox hunting another stealth infringement on peoples’ rights and privileges? Did Tony Blair just slip that past Britons?
JD: That’s exactly what Tony Blair did. It was his way of winning over the left because, particularly with fox hunting, which is associated with the English upper class. In fact, one Labour MP explicitly stated that he saw this as revenge for the miners strike. Which is when Margaret Thatcher, in order to destroy the dinosaur unions’ power base, broke the mining unions. And you know, I mean, I’ve been fox hunting, which is the most fun thing you can do with your clothes on or off.
JB: Hmm. I’m a fan of internal combustion, not horses, so let’s leave that one there.
I would like you to think for just a moment about the restrictions of religious freedom in a number of places over hear, and over here restriction of religious freedom takes the form of people trying to drive God out of the public place. It seems to me it’s a different form over in England, that the only religion that is protected anymore is Islam. Is that true and how does that arise and do you see that that happens here?
JD: It’s because Islam is so much more shrill and less tolerant than any other religion. Despite its claims to be the religion of peace. I think one of the curses of the relative peace we’ve enjoyed since World War II and the Cold War is that people have forgotten in our society what it means to stand up for your principles, which is why militant Islam has got us over a barrel.
We’re used to this idea that we should all care for each other and live and let live and all that. And suddenly we’re confronted with this very hard-line religion which does not take prisoners and does not compromise, and our way of dealing with that so far as a society has been to think that, if we just give them a little what they want, they’ll be happy and go away. And they won’t.
JB: James, many thanks for talking to us.
JD: My pleasure.
HUMAN EVENTS editor Jed Babbin's exclusive interview with James Delingpole, author of “Welcome to Obamaland: I Have Seen Your Future and it Doesn’t Work”:
Jed Babbin: James Delingpole: You claim to have seen America’s future because Britain is living it. What do you predict for us under Obama’s administration?
James Delingpole: Because it’s easy to see his path to spend America into another depression. And don’t forget: Your Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, wondered aloud why they call it “the Great Depression.” She mused that it wasn’t so great. But that’s where you’re headed.
JB: Why?
JD: They’ve got an agenda that can only be described as a smorgasbord of expense and misery. Higher taxes. Number two, aruinously expensive, ever-expanding, ever-worsening universal heath care system. I predict increased government interference in areas of your life where you might feel that government has no darned right to interfere. For example, things like your freedom to hunt, how you look after your pets -- even rules governing how you dispose of your trash. You might even have spy cameras in your trash cans like we do in England.
JB: Whoa, whoa -- spy cameras in your trashcans?
JD: Yeah, sounds crazy but it’s true. We now have places where you have spy cameras in your trashcans to find out whether you are disposing of your rubbish in an ecologically-sound way or not. This is happening in England now. Then there are rules governing how much you eat, how much you drink. Actually, just out of interest, this is one of the many unpleasant side effects of a state health care system. The state believes that given that it is so generously providing you with medicine it therefore ought to take control of your body: what kind of food you eat, whether or not your smoke. Something similar applied in Nazi Germany.
JB: Let’s go right to health care. We are promised a health care system that is going to take better care of us. It’s going to bring cost down. Well, ... that’s what they’re promising. Didn’t Mr. Blair promise that too?
JD: Oh my goodness. Do you know how much our National Health Service costs in Britain?
JB: No idea.
JD: 95 billion pounds. That is about 20 billion pounds more than we spend on education. That’s about three times our defense budget. It is the single biggest government department of all.
JB: But now, that pays for everything, right? I mean, it pays everybody’s medical costs everything.
JD: Well, that’s the theory. Free universal health care at the point of need. The problem is, I think something like 60 % of doctors do not use the system. We have the lowest cancer survival rates of any, any G-8 nation. The more we pumped into our health care system, the worst it seems to have got. All that money has gone into layers of administration. Our National Health Service, I believe, is the world’s third biggest employer after the Chinese army and the Indian state railways. It’s maybe the envy of the third world, but with all the health tourists we get coming to sponge off our system. But if you’re a taxpayer who has to use this system, it’s, it’s a joke, and, if Obama’s talking about it costing you between 50 billion and 65 billion dollars…
JB: Right.
JD: If it costs anything less than a ten times that, I’m a banana. It’ll be ruinous. And, get this: once you’ve started it, it will never stop. It will suck up more, and more, and more of your money. Whichever administration comes in in eight years time to replace -- yes, I’m afraid it will be eight years -- to replace Obama, they aren’t going to be able to shut off the faucets that easily.
JB: But the issue of education: liberals are always telling us that everything they do is “for the children.” And President Obama wants a big part of his so-called “economic stimulus” bill for school construction. Is that what worries you?
JD: No, not entirely. The spending is only half the problem. With Obama and other entirely dedicated liberals, you get elitism. Excellence, and traditional learning will be replaced by touchy-feely, esteem-boosting, non-competitiveness. You’ll see old-fashioned subjects being hijacked as a way of advancing the left liberal agenda. For example, geography will no longer be about rivers, and capitals, and borders -- physical geography. It will be about feeling guilty about global warming and why it’s all our fault. History will become about -- not about the greatness of Jefferson and Washington, it will be about feeling guilty for the slave trade.
You will also see in the name of multiculturalism still further surrenders to the aggression of Islam. You will see more affirmative action programs, which of course are supposed to make things fairer but will inevitably make things less fair and create greater social resentment and greater social injustice. You will see further unsustainable immigration, both legal and illegal, but what you will not see is the assimilation that America so desperately needs if immigration is ever gonna work. You’ll see further division of America into Spanish speaking and English speaking parts, because nobody can be bothered to insist that, that immigrants learn English as they should.
JB: Now you claim to be able to see into the future for America. Why do you think Mr. Obama is going to do to England, do to America rather, what Mr. Blair did to England?
JD: Because I think they come from the same mold. For a start, they’re both ex-lawyers and they are people of the liberal left. When the English electorate, British electorate, voted in Tony Blair in 1997, I think a lot of them thought they were getting something else. A bit like people in America now see Obama as this wonderful all-purpose solution to all their problems . When Blair started talking about this wonderful thing called “the Third Way,” people really were gullible enough to believe in this emperor's new clothes, which is what it was. Blair gave this impression that he had this wonderful new idea where you could have on the one hand a fully functioning capitalist system with healthy economy and on the other hand social justice. And he would achieve this through a magical process of triangulation.
JB: Let me stop you right there. That sounds an awful lot to me like the promise of hope and change.
JD: Yea absolutely, the audacity of hope. Can I just say that hope is not an audacious thing, hope is a desperate thing. It should have been called the Desperation of Hope.
JB: Mr. Obama clearly revealed himself through Joe the Plumber with that remark about wanting to redistribute wealth. What did Mr. Blair do? Did he go about redistributing the wealth of England?
JD: Yes, he did it. As I’m sure you know he has a nasty henchmen called Gordon Brown, who was his chancellor of the exchequer
JB: And is now the prime minister.
JD: Gordon Brown is much more obviously left wing than Tony Blair, much more avowedly left wing -- he’s an old school socialist. And in order to disguise the socialist nature of the government, what they did was introduce these stealth taxes. The first thing, the first major policy move that Gordon Brown made was he gave independence to the Bank of England to set interest rates and people decided to interpret this as a sign of bi-partisan, pragmatic, business-friendly, market-savvy government. And it fooled a lot of right wing commentators, It gave Brown a false reputation for fiscal responsibility which effectively gave him pretty much a free pass over the next few years to drift as leftward as he liked. He did this very sneakily, mind you, in the form of “stealth taxes”
Rather than bump up income tax by 5%, which is effectively what you did in taxation terms, instead he hid these taxes in other forms he started taxing pensions started taxing the pension funds so that the public the public didn’t see these very complicated financial instruments. Americans should expect this same sort of stealthy taxation,.
JB: Didn’t Mr. Blair also sort of tilt British politics toward the green side? He was trying to make everything eco-friendly?
JD: Yes, he did, but that came later on in his regime. I think that whole green thing really is a phenomenon of the last 5 or 6 years rather than the first 5 years of Blair’s regime. I mean, he was in office about 10 years.
JB: So we have an issue of raising taxes, redistributing wealth going to the global warming whacko side.
JD: Yeah, I don’t think Americas realize, preoccupied as they are with their own economic woes, just how badly screwed the English economy is of all the G-8 nations (the IMF has told us this [is] the one officially least likely to come out of the recession any time soon). And the reason for that is we have just enjoyed a period of the most extreme tax and spend socialism.
We’ve been spending money that we don’t have. One of the worst things that Gordon Brown did was sell our gold reserves in order to fund this spending spree. He sold them at about a quarter of the price, I think. When he sold, it was about 200 dollars an ounce and it's now about $850 an ounce -- aquarter of the price, and then he went crazy with the money -- our money -- like it was his money and he’d just won the Lottery. And now of course he can't keep to his spending plans because he’s not getting the tax income because the economy is shrinking.
JB: In terms of some of the other things you see coming from Mr. Obama, I mean, I’m wondering if things like restrictions on political speech and free speech have come about in England and how they work. We’re looking down the gun barrel of this so-called “Fairness Doctrine.”
JD: One of the things that delighted me in coming to America is realizing how much more freely I can speak my mind over here than I can in England. This is partly of course because I’ve been talking to some good old right wing talk shows. I felt very much at home there. But it's mainly, I think, because there are various forms of censorship in Britain ranging from direct censorship -- for example we have new laws circumscribing what they call hate speech which is basically a euphemism for any criticism of Islam whatsoever.
There are new rules actually telling comedians the sort of jokes they're allowed to tell. You are not allowed to tell jokes about religion anymore. But it’s not religion in general. You know people have been mocking Christianity for years -- look at Monty Python’s “Life of Brian,” a very funny film that is still legal. But when it comes to the “religion of peace,” people start getting uncomfortable.
Without ever acknowledging it, our government has introduced this two-tiered legal system where there’s one rule for everyone else and another special one for the Muslims in case they get upset about anything. This is the direct form of censorship I mentioned. Then there’s indirect censorship in the form of what you might call self-censorship.
The sort of views I’m expressing in America I wouldn’t feel very comfortable on British radio.
JB: Well in terms of that, one question about the BBC itself. I mean, it seems to me that that’s part of what the American Revolution was about. Taxation without representation. Conservatives can’t get an equal voice on BBC, but everybody pays the BBC tax, right?
JD: Yes, just digressing for a second. You might make the same point about Europe. Europe is a classic example of taxation without representation. 80% of all our new laws in Britain -- 80%! -- we have no control over. They come direct from the EU and are rubber stamped by their amen corner in the British left liberal government. But, sorry, to go back to your point about the BBC, yea its absolutely true. Dear old BBC, they try, they want to be neutral, but the problem is because everyone that they employ is recruited through a left wing newspaper called The Guardian, which is where they run all their media recruitment ads, their idea of neutrality, in the center of the road, is what anyone else would call quite far left. So what do you do? As a right-winger, I’m sometimes wheeled on as the sort of freak to scare the babies and the grandmothers. I’m the comic turn.
JB: Well we see some of these things coming, and I don’t know that we can see that in America’s future. Do you think were in that much danger of this sort of thing?
JD: Yes.
JB: Why?
JD: Well, because of The Fairness Doctrine I see it happening. Look, America may try and delude itself that it has always been a land of free speech and the center ground and common sense. And you talk to any of my left liberal friends, and they would tell you that, but look at Woodrow Wilson. Look at FDR. Look at what Kennedy would have done if he’d lived. Look at Lyndon Johnson. These were all what Jonah Goldberg would call approximations of liberal fascist dictatorships.
JD: Can I give you one example which is kowtowing to the Green lobby? I cannot understand how, as the world approaches its greatest depression since the 1930s, how President Obama can talk about nailing his clothes to the mast of this whacko ideology which was developed during a time of economic plenty by krypto communists who joined the green movement because they needed a new base from which to destroy the capitalist system after the Berlin Wall came down. Does he really imagine that imposing carbon taxes on U.S. industry is going to help your economy in its direst hour of need?
JB: Now you’ve tried that already in Britain, haven’t you?
JD: Yes, we have, and, let me tell you, it hasn’t just affected us negatively in our economy, it has also affected our energy security by lessening it.
JB: And jobs, I suspect.
JD: And jobs too, yes. Because the Green Lobby has so bullied successive governments, but particularly this left liberal one, into ducking the issue of nuclear power. Nobody has plucked up the courage to say we need to generate power, nuclear power, we must build nuclear power stations. It takes about 10 years to build a nuclear power station. The result of this is that we are reliant on Russia for our gas supplies. We got rid of most of our coal because of the battle that Margaret Thatcher fought with the unions in the 1980s. We have no nuclear power. But our Labour government has committed us to following the impossible carbon-reduction agenda of the bullying EU into building all these wind farms which don’t work when it’s not windy enough and don’t work when it’s too windy. All they do really is ruin the countryside. Which is kind of weird when you think that environmentalists are supposed to love nature.
JB: Parallel to all the green stuff that we hear from Mr. Obama, I see in England something that is really much as dark and probably as restrictive of personal freedom. I’m not sure its quite as much effect on the economy. We have a very large and very active hunting and shooting community here. Now Britain has already banned fox hunting, and the Countryside Alliance folks are telling me well the next thing they’re going to do is ban shooting. Where is this coming from? Do you see roots of this here in America?
JD: Well you’ve got PETA as we’ve got PETA. The problem with the animal rights lobby is give them an inch, and they’ll take a mile. First of all, fox hunting goes, then they start coming after the shooters, next it’ll be the fishermen. They’re never satisfied. Once you believe animals have rights, what does PETA call fish now? Is it sea kittens?
JB: Sea kittens?
JB: Is this ban on fox hunting another stealth infringement on peoples’ rights and privileges? Did Tony Blair just slip that past Britons?
JD: That’s exactly what Tony Blair did. It was his way of winning over the left because, particularly with fox hunting, which is associated with the English upper class. In fact, one Labour MP explicitly stated that he saw this as revenge for the miners strike. Which is when Margaret Thatcher, in order to destroy the dinosaur unions’ power base, broke the mining unions. And you know, I mean, I’ve been fox hunting, which is the most fun thing you can do with your clothes on or off.
JB: Hmm. I’m a fan of internal combustion, not horses, so let’s leave that one there.
I would like you to think for just a moment about the restrictions of religious freedom in a number of places over hear, and over here restriction of religious freedom takes the form of people trying to drive God out of the public place. It seems to me it’s a different form over in England, that the only religion that is protected anymore is Islam. Is that true and how does that arise and do you see that that happens here?
JD: It’s because Islam is so much more shrill and less tolerant than any other religion. Despite its claims to be the religion of peace. I think one of the curses of the relative peace we’ve enjoyed since World War II and the Cold War is that people have forgotten in our society what it means to stand up for your principles, which is why militant Islam has got us over a barrel.
We’re used to this idea that we should all care for each other and live and let live and all that. And suddenly we’re confronted with this very hard-line religion which does not take prisoners and does not compromise, and our way of dealing with that so far as a society has been to think that, if we just give them a little what they want, they’ll be happy and go away. And they won’t.
JB: James, many thanks for talking to us.
JD: My pleasure.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Ron Paul: Stimulus Packages Will Turn Recession Into A Depression
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Tuesday, Jan 27th, 2009
Texas Congressman Ron Paul has warned that passing the latest proposed economic stimulus package would be akin to pouring kerosene on an already raging fire.
Paul, who is also a member of the House Financial Services Committee, warned that such measures will cause a recession to turn into a full scale depression possibly worse than that of the 1930s.
During a Television interview with CNN, Paul explained why he believes stimulus funding is such a destructive policy.
“It’s because the government is spending it. If the people were spending it it would be fine, but the government never does anything productive. They have to take money from productive individuals and spend it in non productive ways, so it’s just digging a bigger hole, getting us into bigger debt, and that is the problem.” Paul said.
“This stimulus package is going to cost each and every American $6700 of more debt, so how can that be beneficial? If debt was the answer we would of never had a problem.”
“We are doing exactly what we did in the 1930s, we are taking a recession and working very hard to try and turn it into a depression.” The Congressman added.
“What we’re worried about right now, well certainly I am, is that it’s worse than the 30’s because we’re on the verge of destroying the dollar. So if you think the financial crisis is bad, and the financial system isn’t working, wait ’til you find out when the Dollar doesn’t work.”
The Congressman told viewers that only by liquidating debt, allowing the market to operate freely and allowing prices to come down will the problem be corrected.
Paul also spoke to those who have blamed the free market for the downturn and have suggested that deregulation is a primary cause of the financial crisis.
“We never had a hands off approach, that’s the fallacy, and as long as we believe that we will never correct our problem. If you blame Capitalism and free markets and sound money for this then we can’t win the intellectual fight.” Paul urged.
“If you want to regulate, regulate Government agencies, regulate the Treasury, regulate the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve has no oversight, they’re not even permitted to be audited by law, so that’s the kind of oversight we need. The Federal Reserve has committed trillions of dollars to individuals, corporations and banks, they don’t even have to tell us where it’s gone to.” he added.
The Congressman also appeared on MSNBC this morning to discuss the same issue.
One commentator suggested that Paul’s analysis was misguided because “The house is already on fire” and something must be done to put it out.
“You are correct, the house is on fire,” Paul fired back, “and you think you’re putting water on it, but I think you are pouring kerosene on it.” he added.
“We got into this mess by spending too much, borrowing too much and inflating too much. Government was too big and we had too many regulations. We had rejected the market economy for decades, we have rejected the notion of sound money for decades, and we got into a mess this way. So what is the proposal? Spend more money, borrow more money, print more money, regulate more, it makes no sense whatsoever.” Paul asserted.
The Congressman suggested that a more sound approach to the crisis would be to abolish income tax and business tax to get Americans spending, whilst simultaneously cutting overseas spending to cover revenue losses.
“But the problem is no one wants to cut the American Empire,” Paul explained.
“Even Obama’s administration wants to increase spending overseas and increase military spending. As long as you want to run the world empire at a trillion dollars a year, believe me you cannot solve this problem.” he added.
Infowars.net
Tuesday, Jan 27th, 2009
Texas Congressman Ron Paul has warned that passing the latest proposed economic stimulus package would be akin to pouring kerosene on an already raging fire.
Paul, who is also a member of the House Financial Services Committee, warned that such measures will cause a recession to turn into a full scale depression possibly worse than that of the 1930s.
During a Television interview with CNN, Paul explained why he believes stimulus funding is such a destructive policy.
“It’s because the government is spending it. If the people were spending it it would be fine, but the government never does anything productive. They have to take money from productive individuals and spend it in non productive ways, so it’s just digging a bigger hole, getting us into bigger debt, and that is the problem.” Paul said.
“This stimulus package is going to cost each and every American $6700 of more debt, so how can that be beneficial? If debt was the answer we would of never had a problem.”
“We are doing exactly what we did in the 1930s, we are taking a recession and working very hard to try and turn it into a depression.” The Congressman added.
“What we’re worried about right now, well certainly I am, is that it’s worse than the 30’s because we’re on the verge of destroying the dollar. So if you think the financial crisis is bad, and the financial system isn’t working, wait ’til you find out when the Dollar doesn’t work.”
The Congressman told viewers that only by liquidating debt, allowing the market to operate freely and allowing prices to come down will the problem be corrected.
Paul also spoke to those who have blamed the free market for the downturn and have suggested that deregulation is a primary cause of the financial crisis.
“We never had a hands off approach, that’s the fallacy, and as long as we believe that we will never correct our problem. If you blame Capitalism and free markets and sound money for this then we can’t win the intellectual fight.” Paul urged.
“If you want to regulate, regulate Government agencies, regulate the Treasury, regulate the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve has no oversight, they’re not even permitted to be audited by law, so that’s the kind of oversight we need. The Federal Reserve has committed trillions of dollars to individuals, corporations and banks, they don’t even have to tell us where it’s gone to.” he added.
The Congressman also appeared on MSNBC this morning to discuss the same issue.
One commentator suggested that Paul’s analysis was misguided because “The house is already on fire” and something must be done to put it out.
“You are correct, the house is on fire,” Paul fired back, “and you think you’re putting water on it, but I think you are pouring kerosene on it.” he added.
“We got into this mess by spending too much, borrowing too much and inflating too much. Government was too big and we had too many regulations. We had rejected the market economy for decades, we have rejected the notion of sound money for decades, and we got into a mess this way. So what is the proposal? Spend more money, borrow more money, print more money, regulate more, it makes no sense whatsoever.” Paul asserted.
The Congressman suggested that a more sound approach to the crisis would be to abolish income tax and business tax to get Americans spending, whilst simultaneously cutting overseas spending to cover revenue losses.
“But the problem is no one wants to cut the American Empire,” Paul explained.
“Even Obama’s administration wants to increase spending overseas and increase military spending. As long as you want to run the world empire at a trillion dollars a year, believe me you cannot solve this problem.” he added.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Obama Says Recession Requires Scaling Back Promises (Update2)
By Edwin Chen
Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama said reviving the U.S. economy will require scaling back on his campaign promises and personal sacrifice from all Americans.
“I want to be realistic here, not everything that we talked about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace we had hoped,” Obama said in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program broadcast this morning. “Everybody’s going to have to give.”
Obama also said in the interview recorded yesterday that he wants stricter guidelines and greater transparency in spending the remaining $350 billion in the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Obama takes office Jan. 20 and is pressing Congress to act quickly on a two-year economic stimulus plan of about $775 billion that includes new government spending and tax cuts. As part of his campaign to build support from lawmakers and the public, Obama has been speaking about the economy every day over the past week, warning of a deeper and more prolonged recession without government action.
Though some Democrats have resisted elements of Obama’s plan, recent economic data have helped him make his point. The Labor Department reported Jan. 9 that the U.S. lost almost 2.6 million jobs in 2008 and that the unemployment rate jumped to 7.2 percent in December, the highest level in almost 16 years. The losses were widespread, with manufacturers, builders, retailers and temporary-help agencies axing positions.
Indicators
“Whether it’s retail sales, manufacturing, all of the indicators show that we are in the worst recession since the Great Depression,” Obama said on ABC. The result is that all Americans will feel the effects of efforts to put the economy back on track, he said.
“Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game,” he said.
Companies including Boeing Co., the world’s second-largest commercial-plane maker, CSX Corp., the third- largest U.S. railroad, and General Dynamics Corp., the second-largest shipbuilder for the U.S. Navy, announced job cuts last week.
The Standard and Poor’s 500 Index has lost 37 percent in the past 12 months and the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 33 percent.
The last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, faced a similar predicament. In the face of a deepening budget deficit, Clinton during his transition scaled back his spending plans and abandoned a campaign pledge to enact a middle-class tax cut.
Report on Plan
Obama yesterday released a report by his economic advisers that forecasts his two-year stimulus proposal would generate as many as 4 million jobs, higher than his previous estimates, the biggest portion of them in construction, manufacturing and retail.
The plan would also result in the U.S. gross domestic product increasing by 3.7 percent more by the end of 2010 than it would without the stimulus, according to a study compiled by Obama’s economic advisers. The study gives a forecast based on a package of spending and tax cuts totaling “slightly over” the $775 billion that has been discussed by the transition team with members of Congress.
Even with the GDP improvement forecast in the report, the unemployment rate is forecast to be about 7 percent, according to its authors Christina Romer, the president-elect’s pick to head the White House Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, economic policy director for Vice President-elect Joe Biden.
Construction Jobs
The single biggest job gains would be in construction, according to the report, with 678,000 created by the fourth quarter of 2010. Another 604,000 jobs would be created or saved in the retail sector and 408,000 in manufacturing.
Most of the jobs created by government spending on infrastructure, education, health and energy would come in 2010 and 2011 because of the time it would take to carry out programs in those areas, the report said.
The Congressional Budget Office forecast that the recession and government outlays for bailouts will push the budget deficit to at least $1.18 trillion this fiscal year. Obama said Jan. 6 that he expects similar shortfalls “for years to come.”
Some congressional Democrats have criticized the portion of the plan devoted to tax cuts, while Republicans have voiced concern about the size of the proposal and its effect on the deficit.
Bailout Plan
Part of the increase in the deficit estimate stems from the $700 billion financial market’s bailout plan approved by Congress last year.
Obama said that he is “disappointed with how the whole TARP process has unfolded,” including insufficient oversight. He also said not enough has been done to help those facing home foreclosures.
Obama said he intends to “lay out very specifically” ways that he would spend the next $350 billion. “We can regain the confidence of both Congress and the American people that this is not just money that is being given to banks without any strings attached and nobody knows what happens, but rather that it is targeted very specifically at getting credit flowing again to businesses and families.”
He declined to say whether he wants President George W. Bush to request from Congress access to the second half of the money before Inauguration Day.
Among the campaign promises that may be delayed is his vow to quickly close the prison camp at the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
“It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize,” Obama said, adding that he still plans to shut down the facility, used to detain enemy combatants suspected of being terrorists.
Foreign Policy
On foreign policy, Obama again declined to be drawn into a substantive discussion of the new violence between the Hamas in the Gaza Strip and Israel. Pressed on his silence on the issue, Obama said the escalating conflict “makes me much more determined to try to break a deadlock that has gone on for decades.”
He said he is putting together a team that will ensure his administration is “immediately engaged” in the Middle East peace process right after he’s sworn in.
“The politics of it are hard. And the reason it’s so important for the United States to be engaged and involved immediately, not waiting until the end of their term, is because working through the politics of this requires a third party that everybody has confidence wants to see a fair and just outcome.”
Obama said Iran “is going to be one of our biggest challenges,” and said some form of engagement with Tehran was “the place to start.”
While his administration will be willing to talk, there will have to be “clarity about what our bottom lines are,” he said, without giving details.
Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama said reviving the U.S. economy will require scaling back on his campaign promises and personal sacrifice from all Americans.
“I want to be realistic here, not everything that we talked about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace we had hoped,” Obama said in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program broadcast this morning. “Everybody’s going to have to give.”
Obama also said in the interview recorded yesterday that he wants stricter guidelines and greater transparency in spending the remaining $350 billion in the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
Obama takes office Jan. 20 and is pressing Congress to act quickly on a two-year economic stimulus plan of about $775 billion that includes new government spending and tax cuts. As part of his campaign to build support from lawmakers and the public, Obama has been speaking about the economy every day over the past week, warning of a deeper and more prolonged recession without government action.
Though some Democrats have resisted elements of Obama’s plan, recent economic data have helped him make his point. The Labor Department reported Jan. 9 that the U.S. lost almost 2.6 million jobs in 2008 and that the unemployment rate jumped to 7.2 percent in December, the highest level in almost 16 years. The losses were widespread, with manufacturers, builders, retailers and temporary-help agencies axing positions.
Indicators
“Whether it’s retail sales, manufacturing, all of the indicators show that we are in the worst recession since the Great Depression,” Obama said on ABC. The result is that all Americans will feel the effects of efforts to put the economy back on track, he said.
“Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game,” he said.
Companies including Boeing Co., the world’s second-largest commercial-plane maker, CSX Corp., the third- largest U.S. railroad, and General Dynamics Corp., the second-largest shipbuilder for the U.S. Navy, announced job cuts last week.
The Standard and Poor’s 500 Index has lost 37 percent in the past 12 months and the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 33 percent.
The last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, faced a similar predicament. In the face of a deepening budget deficit, Clinton during his transition scaled back his spending plans and abandoned a campaign pledge to enact a middle-class tax cut.
Report on Plan
Obama yesterday released a report by his economic advisers that forecasts his two-year stimulus proposal would generate as many as 4 million jobs, higher than his previous estimates, the biggest portion of them in construction, manufacturing and retail.
The plan would also result in the U.S. gross domestic product increasing by 3.7 percent more by the end of 2010 than it would without the stimulus, according to a study compiled by Obama’s economic advisers. The study gives a forecast based on a package of spending and tax cuts totaling “slightly over” the $775 billion that has been discussed by the transition team with members of Congress.
Even with the GDP improvement forecast in the report, the unemployment rate is forecast to be about 7 percent, according to its authors Christina Romer, the president-elect’s pick to head the White House Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, economic policy director for Vice President-elect Joe Biden.
Construction Jobs
The single biggest job gains would be in construction, according to the report, with 678,000 created by the fourth quarter of 2010. Another 604,000 jobs would be created or saved in the retail sector and 408,000 in manufacturing.
Most of the jobs created by government spending on infrastructure, education, health and energy would come in 2010 and 2011 because of the time it would take to carry out programs in those areas, the report said.
The Congressional Budget Office forecast that the recession and government outlays for bailouts will push the budget deficit to at least $1.18 trillion this fiscal year. Obama said Jan. 6 that he expects similar shortfalls “for years to come.”
Some congressional Democrats have criticized the portion of the plan devoted to tax cuts, while Republicans have voiced concern about the size of the proposal and its effect on the deficit.
Bailout Plan
Part of the increase in the deficit estimate stems from the $700 billion financial market’s bailout plan approved by Congress last year.
Obama said that he is “disappointed with how the whole TARP process has unfolded,” including insufficient oversight. He also said not enough has been done to help those facing home foreclosures.
Obama said he intends to “lay out very specifically” ways that he would spend the next $350 billion. “We can regain the confidence of both Congress and the American people that this is not just money that is being given to banks without any strings attached and nobody knows what happens, but rather that it is targeted very specifically at getting credit flowing again to businesses and families.”
He declined to say whether he wants President George W. Bush to request from Congress access to the second half of the money before Inauguration Day.
Among the campaign promises that may be delayed is his vow to quickly close the prison camp at the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
“It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize,” Obama said, adding that he still plans to shut down the facility, used to detain enemy combatants suspected of being terrorists.
Foreign Policy
On foreign policy, Obama again declined to be drawn into a substantive discussion of the new violence between the Hamas in the Gaza Strip and Israel. Pressed on his silence on the issue, Obama said the escalating conflict “makes me much more determined to try to break a deadlock that has gone on for decades.”
He said he is putting together a team that will ensure his administration is “immediately engaged” in the Middle East peace process right after he’s sworn in.
“The politics of it are hard. And the reason it’s so important for the United States to be engaged and involved immediately, not waiting until the end of their term, is because working through the politics of this requires a third party that everybody has confidence wants to see a fair and just outcome.”
Obama said Iran “is going to be one of our biggest challenges,” and said some form of engagement with Tehran was “the place to start.”
While his administration will be willing to talk, there will have to be “clarity about what our bottom lines are,” he said, without giving details.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Obama to warn it may soon be too late to save economy
06:18 AM
President-elect Barack Obama this morning will warn that unless "dramatic action" is taken quickly, it may be too late to pull the economy out of a recession that could last for years.
His staff just released excerpts from a speech the president-elect is due to give at 11 a.m. ET. Among those excerpts:
• "I don't believe it's too late to change course, but it will be if we don't take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.
"In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse."
• "There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable. It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term. But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy. It is true that we cannot depend on government alone to create jobs or long-term growth, but at this particular moment, only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe. Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy –- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit."
• "It is time to set a new course for this economy, and that change must begin now. We should have an open and honest discussion about this recovery plan in the days ahead, but I urge Congress to move as quickly as possible on behalf of the American people. For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse."
We're planning to live-blog the president-elect's speech, which he'll give at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Check back here at The Oval as 11 a.m. ET approaches.
Speaking of the economy and unemployment in particular, USA TODAY's Barbara Hagenbaugh and Sue Kirchhoff write this morning that some experts believe that employment news could get "truly gruesome" in coming months.
President-elect Barack Obama this morning will warn that unless "dramatic action" is taken quickly, it may be too late to pull the economy out of a recession that could last for years.
His staff just released excerpts from a speech the president-elect is due to give at 11 a.m. ET. Among those excerpts:
• "I don't believe it's too late to change course, but it will be if we don't take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.
"In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse."
• "There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable. It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term. But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy. It is true that we cannot depend on government alone to create jobs or long-term growth, but at this particular moment, only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe. Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy –- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit."
• "It is time to set a new course for this economy, and that change must begin now. We should have an open and honest discussion about this recovery plan in the days ahead, but I urge Congress to move as quickly as possible on behalf of the American people. For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse."
We're planning to live-blog the president-elect's speech, which he'll give at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Check back here at The Oval as 11 a.m. ET approaches.
Speaking of the economy and unemployment in particular, USA TODAY's Barbara Hagenbaugh and Sue Kirchhoff write this morning that some experts believe that employment news could get "truly gruesome" in coming months.
Obama to warn it may soon be too late to save economy
06:18 AM
President-elect Barack Obama this morning will warn that unless "dramatic action" is taken quickly, it may be too late to pull the economy out of a recession that could last for years.
His staff just released excerpts from a speech the president-elect is due to give at 11 a.m. ET. Among those excerpts:
• "I don't believe it's too late to change course, but it will be if we don't take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.
"In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse."
• "There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable. It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term. But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy. It is true that we cannot depend on government alone to create jobs or long-term growth, but at this particular moment, only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe. Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy –- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit."
• "It is time to set a new course for this economy, and that change must begin now. We should have an open and honest discussion about this recovery plan in the days ahead, but I urge Congress to move as quickly as possible on behalf of the American people. For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse."
We're planning to live-blog the president-elect's speech, which he'll give at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Check back here at The Oval as 11 a.m. ET approaches.
Speaking of the economy and unemployment in particular, USA TODAY's Barbara Hagenbaugh and Sue Kirchhoff write this morning that some experts believe that employment news could get "truly gruesome" in coming months.
President-elect Barack Obama this morning will warn that unless "dramatic action" is taken quickly, it may be too late to pull the economy out of a recession that could last for years.
His staff just released excerpts from a speech the president-elect is due to give at 11 a.m. ET. Among those excerpts:
• "I don't believe it's too late to change course, but it will be if we don't take dramatic action as soon as possible. If nothing is done, this recession could linger for years. The unemployment rate could reach double digits. Our economy could fall $1 trillion short of its full capacity, which translates into more than $12,000 in lost income for a family of four. We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.
"In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse."
• "There is no doubt that the cost of this plan will be considerable. It will certainly add to the budget deficit in the short-term. But equally certain are the consequences of doing too little or nothing at all, for that will lead to an even greater deficit of jobs, incomes, and confidence in our economy. It is true that we cannot depend on government alone to create jobs or long-term growth, but at this particular moment, only government can provide the short-term boost necessary to lift us from a recession this deep and severe. Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy –- where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit."
• "It is time to set a new course for this economy, and that change must begin now. We should have an open and honest discussion about this recovery plan in the days ahead, but I urge Congress to move as quickly as possible on behalf of the American people. For every day we wait or point fingers or drag our feet, more Americans will lose their jobs. More families will lose their savings. More dreams will be deferred and denied. And our nation will sink deeper into a crisis that, at some point, we may not be able to reverse."
We're planning to live-blog the president-elect's speech, which he'll give at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Check back here at The Oval as 11 a.m. ET approaches.
Speaking of the economy and unemployment in particular, USA TODAY's Barbara Hagenbaugh and Sue Kirchhoff write this morning that some experts believe that employment news could get "truly gruesome" in coming months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To my Blog!
Posts
All Comments
