The President elect earned his victory. But the euphoria that still surrounds it has generated a cycle of analysis which has completely misinterpreted the results. His victory had many fathers:
The Republican Party ran the worst possible candidate they could. They ran the one man of all their initial candidates that could be most closely associated with incredibly unpopular George W. Bush. They created situation where the candidate had to run against to people, allowing Senator Obama to trumpet a “Change” that meant one thing: Change George W. Bush.
Senator Obama was a terrific candidate for television and a good speaker. Senator McCain’s ratings in these areas are positive only in comparison to Bob Dole.
Senator McCain, the worst available candidate, ran a horrid campaign. He had no real thrust; presented no reason for offering his candidacy and seldom stuck to an issue for long.
Senator Obama made the politically correct decision not to accept public funds. He did break his initial promise but it was the correct thing for him to do. It enabled him to outspend McCain about 4:1.
Senator Obama had overwhelming media support. Senator Obama was the least vetted candidate in since Jimmy Carter. His policy proposals were never analyzed for cost, he was allowed to skate on his past associations ,and the media went to great lengths to ridicule McCain's running mate.
The race factor was a significant benefit to Senator Obama and this was ably assisted by Limbaugh's "Stop Hillary Express"
Issues played almost no part in the election. War, Illegal immigration, fixing the tax structure, and correcting the health care and social security messes were all secondary to the issues above.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Compromise
While Congress fiddles with how to give away money, how much pork goes to where, and how much 3 GOP Senators get as a payoff, here a compromise suggestion that will save money:
For one year, collect no federal tax on anyone who is making less than $250,000 per year. People get about 25% more income each week to buy things, pay their mortgage, or save. The money is immediately added to the economy.
If people buy things, that’s good. It stimulates demand – like a stimulus package is supposed to. If people pay their mortgage, that’s good for housing prices and the value of mortgage securities. If people save it, that is good for the credit markets.
Congress gets to still tax people earning over $250,000 (one of their goals), but those people don’t pay anymore than they are paying now.
The only loser is Congress who does not get to waste the money the way it wants to.
For one year, collect no federal tax on anyone who is making less than $250,000 per year. People get about 25% more income each week to buy things, pay their mortgage, or save. The money is immediately added to the economy.
If people buy things, that’s good. It stimulates demand – like a stimulus package is supposed to. If people pay their mortgage, that’s good for housing prices and the value of mortgage securities. If people save it, that is good for the credit markets.
Congress gets to still tax people earning over $250,000 (one of their goals), but those people don’t pay anymore than they are paying now.
The only loser is Congress who does not get to waste the money the way it wants to.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Appointments
President Obama continues to his record of appointments. He has chosen a series of people who have chosen not to pay their income taxes until caught. Most recently, he announced his Economic Advisors. These appointments included Penny Pritzker.
Ms. Pritzker was the CEO of Superior Savings Bank. According to the FDIC report, Superior collapsed due to “the failure of Superior Bank was directly attributable to the Bank’s Board of Directors and executives ignoring sound risk management principles” and cost taxpayers hundreds of million. In addition to this experience, Ms. Pritzker has another qualification for this post. She was the National Finance Chair of 2008 Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign. Change we can believe in.
Ms. Pritzker was the CEO of Superior Savings Bank. According to the FDIC report, Superior collapsed due to “the failure of Superior Bank was directly attributable to the Bank’s Board of Directors and executives ignoring sound risk management principles” and cost taxpayers hundreds of million. In addition to this experience, Ms. Pritzker has another qualification for this post. She was the National Finance Chair of 2008 Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama’s campaign. Change we can believe in.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
What now?
In the last Presidential election, a very unpopular President, a weak and uninspiring candidate, and the overwhelming bias of the media resulted in the election of a Democrat as President and secured an overwhelming majority in Congress. This interrupted the steady national trend of the last 30 years towards conservatism and away from government dependency.
From Reagan through Gingrich there had been a meaning and a philosophy which was attractive to a majority of Americans. And, there was a spokesman; someone who could get past the media censorship and make a case for what was to be done.
Even the Clinton interruption was minor. His elections can be attributed to unpopular and uninspired candidates and a third party candidacy that split the conservative vote. But the country quickly elected a conservative Congress which governed while Clinton “fiddled”.
While most of the true believers of the mid-90’s kept their promise to return to private life, the remainder lost their way. Professional politicians were created; spending went off the charts; there was no spokesman or leadership. With no real aim, they quickly lost Congress and then the Presidency.
How does this get better?
First, whatever group still remains that believes in free markets and avoiding the dependencies of the redistributionist philosophy that is currently in power, needs to talk about what they stand for. This group also needs to find a leader - someone who can string a few words together (as opposed to the last 5 presidential elections).
Regardless of where this person is, everyone needs to speak with a reasonably consistent voice; do the talk shows, get out to the people – all the people – with their ideas. State simply what should be done and why. Don’t allow the media to portray the negatives – offer real alternatives. Have a positive plan. “Just say No” is not a political platform. How does a Contract sound?
This message needs to emphasis things that are important to everyday life - Job creation, Taxes, Schools, Medical Care. The basis of what needs to be done is Economics. The social agenda is very nice but does not appeal to the majority of voters. Gay marriage is just not a significant issue to people who are overtaxed, unemployed, have no medical insurance and kids who can’t read.
The media outlets that conservatives do are many radio voices. These guys are extremely popular but spend much of their efforts preaching to the choir. This incredible energy needs to be turned from self congratulation and argument into making a cogent presentation. Efforts such as the “Stop Hillary Express” do nothing to convince anyone of the correctness of a position but do turn people off – and it worked out so well.
Meanwhile, there is a Liberal President. The real differences should be presented as real differences, again with positive options to correct the many real problems. Even though the differences are great, this cannot be allowed to devolve into petty personal hatred (See the “Stop Hillary Express”). That will only lose the public relations war, again.
From Reagan through Gingrich there had been a meaning and a philosophy which was attractive to a majority of Americans. And, there was a spokesman; someone who could get past the media censorship and make a case for what was to be done.
Even the Clinton interruption was minor. His elections can be attributed to unpopular and uninspired candidates and a third party candidacy that split the conservative vote. But the country quickly elected a conservative Congress which governed while Clinton “fiddled”.
While most of the true believers of the mid-90’s kept their promise to return to private life, the remainder lost their way. Professional politicians were created; spending went off the charts; there was no spokesman or leadership. With no real aim, they quickly lost Congress and then the Presidency.
How does this get better?
First, whatever group still remains that believes in free markets and avoiding the dependencies of the redistributionist philosophy that is currently in power, needs to talk about what they stand for. This group also needs to find a leader - someone who can string a few words together (as opposed to the last 5 presidential elections).
Regardless of where this person is, everyone needs to speak with a reasonably consistent voice; do the talk shows, get out to the people – all the people – with their ideas. State simply what should be done and why. Don’t allow the media to portray the negatives – offer real alternatives. Have a positive plan. “Just say No” is not a political platform. How does a Contract sound?
This message needs to emphasis things that are important to everyday life - Job creation, Taxes, Schools, Medical Care. The basis of what needs to be done is Economics. The social agenda is very nice but does not appeal to the majority of voters. Gay marriage is just not a significant issue to people who are overtaxed, unemployed, have no medical insurance and kids who can’t read.
The media outlets that conservatives do are many radio voices. These guys are extremely popular but spend much of their efforts preaching to the choir. This incredible energy needs to be turned from self congratulation and argument into making a cogent presentation. Efforts such as the “Stop Hillary Express” do nothing to convince anyone of the correctness of a position but do turn people off – and it worked out so well.
Meanwhile, there is a Liberal President. The real differences should be presented as real differences, again with positive options to correct the many real problems. Even though the differences are great, this cannot be allowed to devolve into petty personal hatred (See the “Stop Hillary Express”). That will only lose the public relations war, again.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Tax Payers
The transparency of this Administration is quite obvious. It is clear that President Obama’s nominees believe that paying taxes is the job for the middle class. He has proposed a Treasury Secretary who doesn’t pay taxes until he is caught and he was approved. His nominee for H&HS Secretary doesn’t pay taxes until he is caught but he will be approved too. Incredibly, they are both taking credit for paying back taxes (after they were caught), like that makes it all better. These were not complicated misapplications of the convoluted tax code. These guys collected income and simply did not report it. This is pretty basic error and something that – for instance - the head of the IRS should be expected to know and would be laughed at if used as an excuse in Tax Court.
While both have admitted to their errors and the Democrats have been falling over themselves in the media trying to explain away these small oversights because “we really need these guys”. The reality is that the country needs people who pay their taxes even more than it needs people who illegally avoid them.
While both have admitted to their errors and the Democrats have been falling over themselves in the media trying to explain away these small oversights because “we really need these guys”. The reality is that the country needs people who pay their taxes even more than it needs people who illegally avoid them.
Foreclosures
Congress and the President seem to be in a desperate rush to save everyone in foreclosure. However, there are several reasons for foreclosures and blindly giving everyone money will not help anything. While people have health issues or some other catastrophe that can severely impact income, there are other reasons.
One of the primary reasons for that the local foreclosure rate is the huge increase in value that occurred in Nassau and Suffolk . As a result, many people refinanced their mortgages in order to access this increase in equity. How many of the foreclosure are in this category? Why isn’t this reported? Where did the money go? Why should these people be helped unless that cash out is returned?
Another reason is that people bought homes they could not afford. When Fannie Mae changed the rules, any borrower could qualify for almost any amount. That does not mean that people had to buy the largest home they could find. For the largest purchase of a life time, some level of care or prudence should be exercised. Stupidity should have no claim on government funding.
One of the primary reasons for that the local foreclosure rate is the huge increase in value that occurred in Nassau and Suffolk . As a result, many people refinanced their mortgages in order to access this increase in equity. How many of the foreclosure are in this category? Why isn’t this reported? Where did the money go? Why should these people be helped unless that cash out is returned?
Another reason is that people bought homes they could not afford. When Fannie Mae changed the rules, any borrower could qualify for almost any amount. That does not mean that people had to buy the largest home they could find. For the largest purchase of a life time, some level of care or prudence should be exercised. Stupidity should have no claim on government funding.
Appointments
A relatively unknown woman from up north has been appointed to the US Senate by Governor Patterson. Her qualifications include being able to see Buffalo from her house, being a hunter and liking the outdoors. Sounds pretty familiar. The skits on SNL are eagarly anticipated as is ridicule by the press. Or is that a one way street?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
