NP Rank:
Billions and Trillions and Bears, Oh My!
During Tuesday’s White House press conference in response to a question about the morality of passing massive federal deficits on to future generations President Barack Obama responded by instructing critics to remember that his administration had inherited massive deficits. At that moment I was thrust back in time to images of my mother rejecting my behavior rationalizations by saying “If your friends jumped off a building would you do it too?” “But moooom, everyone’s doing it” I’d say throwing my hands out wildly. President Obama’s proposed FY 09 budget soars to over $3.5 trillion, more than doubling average Bush era budgets. The Congressional Budget Office is now forecasting deficits over the next decade to exceed a stunning $9.3 trillion. President Obama’s “Bush started it” retort may satisfy the democratic stratagem of deflecting the ramifications of unpopular federal spending expansions onto the previous administration. However, fooling the American public into fiddling as their nation crashes and burns might not be so easy.
A rift now seems to be opening between President Obama and members of his own party. Growing public pressure has forced members of congress to distance themselves from some of the President’s key policy proposals like Cap and Trade, and socialized healthcare. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D, ND) told reporters Monday that he planned to trim President Obama’s budget by $600 billion over 5 years. Alongside Conrad there is bitter opposition from congressional Republican’s with former Obama Commerce Secretary Nominee Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire going so far as say that if enacted, the President’s budget would lead to "National bankruptcy."
Former Republican presidential Candidate Ron Paul went on the record Tuesday telling the Financial Times that current U.S. fiscal policies could lead to a “15 year” depression and a complete collapse of the U.S. monetary system. Paul, a Texas Congressman, believes that current efforts to stimulate the ailing economy are actually preventing a natural correction that should be occurring during this time of economic downturn. Critics be damned, President Obama pressed the case for the rapid expansion of spending during Tuesday’s press conference, calling for massive investments in the nation’s education, and healthcare systems, and environmentally friendly infrastructure. The President vigorously responded to questions about the wisdom of such expenditures at this fragile time asserting that the savings and profit generation of investing in key areas would, over time, “increase prosperity” effectively leveling out deficit ramifications. Former Bush administration official Karl Rove pointed out on Fox News immediately after the President’s news conference what appeared painfully obvious to millions of Americans “If prosperity were growing deficit projections would be decreasing.”
The Federal Reserve announced last week that it was buying more than $1.3 in long and short term treasury securities further adding to a U.S. monetary system which has more than doubled in size since 2000. Common financial wisdom would suggest that such a rapid expansion in a nation’s currency supplies leads to hyper-inflation. However, at a press conference last week Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke responded to that very question by saying that since much of the current supply of money was not being spent into circulation, but rather remaining idly on reserve at Fed regional locations, that we should not expect the inflation rate to rise in any meaningful manner. Current inflation rates remain below ½ of one percent.
However, feeling Jittery about the viability of the U.S. dollar as a long term reserve currency, China’s Reserve Bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan released an essay last week advocating for the creation of a global super currency that would replace the dollar as the world’s reserve. The idea of a global reserve currency has also garnered support from Russian president Dimitri Medvedev as well as Nobel prize winning economist Robert Mundell, the Architect of the European Union Euro. The Chinese hold over $1 trillion in U.S. treasury reserves and any abandonment of the U.S. dollar by the Chinese government would result in a catastrophic collapse in U.S. policy. The U.S. government relies on China buying U.S. debt to finance the soaring deficits being racked up by the Obama administration.
The precariousness of current U.S. spending policies is immeasurable by contemporary standards. Never in recent memory has a nation bet so heavily on their policies being correct with such disastrous repercussions looming if they are wrong. Professor Igor Panarin a renowned political analyst and Dean of the Russian Foreign Ministries School of Diplomatic Studies, caused a stir last year when he published a paper saying that the United States would collapse in the near future and divide up into 6 different autonomous region. Panarin's analysis was largely disregarded at the time of it's release however, with the U.S. government now involved in such a high stakes game of economic Russian Roulette such predictions may indeed hold weight. With the yellow brick road of the American dream now being grown over by the roots and undergrowth in the dark forest of economic crisis, let us all hope that the new stewards of the Emerald City have much more than the same old bells and whistles behind the curtain. With the stock market bears prowling down around early 90’s levels we’re all going to see very soon if President Dorothy’s ruby slippers have one more dose of magic left in those mythical three heel clicks. If not the alternative may come in the form of the last dying gasp of a once mighty nation and a sobbing cry from the rest of the world; perhaps a loud and resounding “Oh my.”
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
-
phrolen
Billings, Montana, United States
Recommendations (87)
-
tikun
Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel -
Roy C
Vancouver, Washington, United States -
Paschen
Narita, Chiba, Japan -
Tina Kells
Vancouver, Canada
-
René
New Orleans, Louisiana, United States -
Swan
Hillsboro, Oregon, United States -
albertacowpoke
Canada -
kjstan59
Riceboro, Georgia, United States -
Rhonda J Mangus
North Tonawanda, New York, United States




Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (28)
at 10:16 on March 25th, 2009
Interesting and timely opinion piece, thanks.
at 13:29 on March 25th, 2009
Thanks ma'am
at 10:40 on March 25th, 2009
Thanks guys. I am deeply concerned; officially scared.
at 13:19 on March 25th, 2009
I don't think it was the Bush era that started it - I think this goes back many presidential terms and that they all contributed to this in some way.
The throwing of the word 'trillion' around though is super scary.
at 13:31 on March 25th, 2009
I know Amy. I keep getting flaskbacks to Mike Meyers and Dr Evil holding his pinky to his mouth "One TRILLION DOLLARS!!!! ohhhhhhhahahahahaha."
at 14:10 on March 25th, 2009
He's making large investments in an effort to achieve long term solutions to major problems. The \window of opportunity in which to do this is small. The budget pays down the deficit for the first 5 years, and depends on the rate of US growth after that. Obama has every right to point out the deficit he inherited, which is mainly comprised of pointless WAR spending and the result of tax cuts for the upper eschelon. It's also important to mention it, because Republicans generally act like 3 year olds and ignore the problems they create while accusing Democrats of bad behavior.
at 14:23 on March 25th, 2009
You keep drinking the partisan cool-aid and living the phony Republican/Democrat lie sir. Meanwhile the rest of the intellectually honest members of the global community will continue to work tirelessly to ensure that we have a society left to come back to after the storm.
at 15:05 on March 25th, 2009
Ah yes, the elitist know nothing who thinks they're beyond either philosophy. Note the trademark 'cool-aid drinker' comment. I just have to point and laugh.
at 15:20 on March 25th, 2009
So you shout "Blood for oil!" and "No tax cuts for the rich! Workers of the world unite!" and then actually find validity in calling "Cool-aid drinkers" a cliche. uhhhhh sure. You win sir. I'll surrender to my ivory tower and wallow in the world's nuance.
at 15:49 on March 25th, 2009
I don't shout any of those things. I think Obama has the balls to do what's been necessary for a long time. Cool-aid drinkers is a cliche.
at 16:54 on March 26th, 2009
nyctuber, I couldn't agree with you more. We've been going down a long decline over a range of areas in the US as the rest of the world catches up, and the whole time just blindly believing that the market will lead us to continuous growth. I'm a believer in the free market, but I also know that when negative externalities are not included in the cost of doing business, the government must step in. Don't like the idea of lead paint in kids' toys? Don't wait for industry to fix it, because all they will do is hire lawyers to say lead paint is harmless. The government must step in to regulate such things.
Obama is now doing what the government should have been doing years ago to fix these problems before they become more expensive than you can possibly image to fix. You single digit trillions is scary, just wait until our ability to innovate anything new (which will be required for our economy to grow) disappears with our frighteningly deteriorating education system. (You'll surely tell me that we have the best higher education system in the world, but I'll respond by saying that a strikingly unrepresentative number of the PhDs in the US are not American born, and an increasing number of them are going back home with their PhDs. Oh, and our secondary education is miserable.)
Bottom line...if we are going to remain competitive (and above water for those of you concerned about melting ice caps), now is the time to put down payment on the serious structural issues that are creaking under the weight of our bloated 'capitalist' system.
at 21:17 on March 26th, 2009
Sure because that's exactly what Obama is going to do.... Revolutionize the education system and not continue to pump more money to the same failing teachers unions that have been dumbing down our kids for four generations. Looking at this problem within the phony left right prism is the problem. We can't look at things pragmatically and find a fix because as you two exemplify we have to pre package our arguements within the parameters of our media manufactured political point of reference.Snap out of it everyone....FOR GODS SAKE...this article is not hyperbole. These aren't made up numbers. This isn't a gawd damned game. Forget your party line crap. Were about to lose everything and you can't see past you pop culture highness.
at 07:23 on March 27th, 2009
That's exaclty what Obama proposes to do...Revolutionize the education system. Doing that will cost money, and you can't leave that to the market to fix on its own. Your thought that he is simply going to "pump more money into the same failing teachers unions" is the very "party line" that you rail against. If you've paid attention to any of his policies (those talked about during the campaign and reflected in his budget and the stimulus), you'll see that he supports both pay for performance and vouchers (1). Neither of these are typical Democrat party line policies, and both (I believe) are essential for revolutionizing education. No Child Left Behind, put in place by Bush, actually started down the path to making some needed changes in the education system, but IT DIDN'T PROVIDE ENOUGH FUNDING. Fixes cost money. We need a lot of fixes.
(1: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/03/12/obama-first-dem-president-to-support-vouchers/)
at 08:04 on March 27th, 2009
Yes you are right because Obama didn't just kill one of the most successful voucher programs in the United States and the appropriations in the budget aren't just pumping more money into an insolvent system, we've all imagined those facts. And in this mythical 4th dimension you live in there will be a flower for every sad face, and small puppies never grow in to tired old pooches; and yes, the great and powerful Oz shouts resoundingly from behind his vintage soviet flag curtain "Yes we can!"
at 10:06 on March 27th, 2009
Where exactly are your "facts"? On your first point, assuming you're talking about the DC school voucher system (but it's hard to tell since you don't cite any sources), Obama has just said he would work to reverse the Dem Congress' funding cut to keep the voucher program alive (as noted in the source I had in my earlier post). Doesn't sound like killing a program to me. On your second point, you're going to have to go into a little more detail on what you want to say about the "insolvent system," becuase really, that's just laziness, not involving facts at all. And on the last part of your note, well, it's cute, but typical of someone who likes to rant but doesn't offer anything that resembles a solution.
at 11:26 on March 27th, 2009
Sir, I have published a book on the subject, work in a congressional office, and am the chairman of an organization that that is working tirelessly every day to bring about real change for Americans. The kind of change that empowers individuals, adheres to constitutional principles, and galvanizes around the ideals of self governance. Honest discussion on these issues go far beyond googling the subject your talking about and posting the first article you find that supports your opinion. Debate is more than innundating your opponent with links to people who think like you (Which by the way your own source doesn't even do. Your article exposes Obama's decision as a political calculation hahaha) The ideologically driven, party line, talking points you and Tuber espouse, continue to empower a parentalist totalitarianism; a sort of grandmotherly fascism that is draining our culture dry of our individual freedom. The people are waking up. Parties are not the answer. People like you and I who are willing to be intellectually honest with each other and look past our culturally conditioned political point of reference will be the answer to this problem. Open minded fairness and honesty means being able to accept truth even if it isn't favorable to your preferred team. Neither digging a bunker and joining a militia or weaving your hair into dreadlocks and throwing fake blood on government officials makes you intellectually honest. Neither "Side" sees the answer clearly. The only political point of reference that you, I or any other person needs is the U.S. Constitution. The rest is in our hands. WE, not the government are real change. WE, not the government find answers and solutions. With out us the government isn't real. Government is a verb not a noun; an action not static. Placing your hope in giving the government more and more power and throwing more and more money into an insolvent and corrosive bureaucracy is folly. It is paying someone to build the prison that you and your children will be kept in. We are the real hope for change and the future. Not some false pop culture parentalist messiah, and surely not the vapid institutions in which he seeks to bloat.
at 18:38 on March 29th, 2009
phrolen, I appreciate your willingness to take this discussion to the ideological level. In many ways I agree with your stance that our system of government has gone awry, and needs a good hose down. This predominantly two party system that disintegrates into extremist views sickens me, and prevents us from solving serious but ulitmately solvable problems.
However, I do feel that the free market, and individual freedoms, must be tempered to a certain extent by government action for the good of the nation and the world. I assume you agree with this, at least in so far as the constitution directs the government to provide for the common defense and promote general welfare. But the subjective nature of "defense" and "welfare" leave the question of how much the government should be doing open to debate. I for one feel that protetion of the environment to ensure that it is available to be enjoyed and harnessed by future generetions is a responsibility of the government, particularly because individuals and industry have proven time and again that they will not make short term sacrificies to ensure long term sustainability. The idea of exteranalities that I touched on in an earlier post in this chain is at the core of that issue.
For the record, I am a registered independent. I do believe that government needs to be small when it makes sense, but it doesn't always make sense. Deregulation, or rather avoided regulation of the financial markets' complex hedgeing vehicles (credit default swaps) are at the root of this financial disaster we are in now. It is not overly burdensome regulation that caused the problem, but allowing the free market to 'self regulate.' The unfortunate response is that we need to spend more tax money to bail us out the problem created, and then put mechanisms in place to prevent it from happening again.
As for the Obama budget, there are certainly things about it I disagree with, but at the core, I do think it is aimed at fixing critical issues that I think the government is responsible for providing.
at 14:46 on March 25th, 2009
Interesting post Phil, good stuff as always!
at 14:54 on March 25th, 2009
Thanks Vinster, glad to hear from you. Like the new picture
at 16:29 on March 25th, 2009
I like this opinion post.
at 23:42 on March 25th, 2009
Well Done. Thanks. Reminds me of Germany during the war and their printing of endless amounts of money. It took wheel barrels of cash to buy a loaf of bread.
at 04:47 on March 26th, 2009
Thanks for this, phrolen!
at 08:10 on March 26th, 2009
Thanks phrolen!
Some people just have a difficult time admitting that they voted for the wrong person. It is obvious to me that President Barack Obama is not running this country. That is why he did not read the bill he just signed. That is why he allowed 9,000 earmarks. That is why he allowed a tax cheat to be apart of his administration. Even though it was Barack Obama who ran on the platform of change. Now where are the honest people in America? Why are there not more people admitting to the fact that he said things just to get elected? Did Barack Obama promise a tax cut or a tax credit or both? Did Barack Obama promise no lobbyist? Seriously is it really about getting people back to work, or changing this country into a socialist country? Out of all the money that has already been spent, can anyone give an account for every penny, if not, why not?
Does anyone know who it is that appropriate funds?
at 12:49 on March 26th, 2009
Thanks phrolen!!!
I think Obama is either a socialist or an idiot who is also a socialist. He publicly blames the Bush presidency, but in reality, his spending will be far worse. FAR worse. War is cheap in comparison (except for, of course, the cost of lives, which are invaluable). Not only is his administration going to increase inflation, his policies will screw up our nation's capitalist system. But that's exactly what he wants to do - cause our nation's capitalism to fail
Anyways, great article.
Mr. Paul
at 13:11 on March 26th, 2009
phrolen this is a great article. Sometimes it takes someone to point out the obvious. If we watched the mainstream media (less FOX) we would all think that the world is wonderful and we.re being saved. It seems to me that his main themes are Health Care, Education and Green energy. I am amazed, being a simple man, where the money for all those things are going to come from. Does anyone have an idea what it will cost to establish a new green energy grid, and when it comes to health care ask each of the Canadian provinces what they expend. The Bureaucracy for a national health care system would be incredible. In regard to Education, who pays the bills for it? Is it not the States?
at 19:23 on March 26th, 2009
Hello Phrolen,
You've written an eloquent opinion piece, which I enjoyed reading. There are points in which I disagree, but I could see where you were coming from and your reasons for saying what you believe in.
Thank you.
~ Swan
at 21:26 on March 26th, 2009
Thank you Swan. I understand that this debate contains many disagreements. I certainly do not tout myself as flawless. Intellectual honesty is what is paramount in the debate. I follow the political wires very closely; getting legislative alerts daily from many angles of the spectrum. Your disagreement is obviously based on observation which is to be commended. Nothing is more revolting in the search of truth than to read either party's daily talkers and then to see them regurgitated into one of these discussions. Thanks for following my work.
at 09:17 on March 27th, 2009
Unfortunately, I believe this is the 'change' he planned all along.