- A lot of right-wingers claim Obama promised that unemployment would not go above 8 percent if the stimulus was passed. Eric Cantor claimed: “We were promised. The president said we would keep unemployment under 8.5 percent (if the stimulus passed).”
Here are the facts: The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan report included a graph that projected unemployment rates without the stimulus would peak at 9% and with the stimulus at just under 8%. That is not a promise; it is a projection, an estimate, a prediction. Claiming it was a promise is crazy talk. It’s like claiming the weatherman lied when he got a forecast wrong.
Read more - Lie: Reagan’s tax cuts resulted in increased revenues.
Fact: Reagan’s tax cuts resulted in decreased revenues. His tax increases resulted in increased revenues.
1981 – the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981. The biggest tax cuts in U.S. history.
1982 – The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982. Repealed much of the tax cuts of 1981, raised unemployment taxes, doubled taxes on cigarettes, tripled taxes on telephone service.
1982 – Highway Revenue Act of 1982 increased the gas tax through 1988
1983 – Social Security Amendments of 1983. Increased Social Security taxes.
1984 – Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. Increased taxes on exports and business expenses.
1986 – Tax Reform Act (TRA) of 1986. Decreased individual taxes but increased corporate taxes.
Source - Lie: Obama’s spending has resulted in a huge budget deficit.
Fact: Obama is responsible for only a small sliver of the deficit.
The recession resulted in reduced tax revenues and increased spending on safety-net programs. The federal debt was doubled during the Bush administration and now we’re paying almost 400 billion a year just on the interest on the debt. Obama has required Congress to pay for any new programs it passes in a restoration of the “pay as you go” system.Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.
About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.
Common Right-Wing Lies
109 Comments to “Common Right-Wing Lies”
-
Mr. Hoffman,
I say that you are wrong. Look at the facts.
Christina Romer, Obama’s Chair, Council of Economic Advisers co-authored the Romer-Bernstein Report that was used to SELL the stimulus package. The numbers were used to JUSTIFY the $787 billion spending. Here is Romer in her own words.
http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/video_christna_romer_explains_a_new_report_about_job_creation/
Here is the actual document.
The graph making the prediction.
Page 4, Figure 1
You said, “with the stimulus at just under 8%. That is not a promise; it is a projection, an estimate, a prediction. Claiming it was a promise is crazy talk.”
Again when the Obama team was trying to sell the Porkulus bill to skeptics, this report was cited. To now claim that this is not a failed promise is, to use the words of Senator Hillary Clinton “really require a willing suspension of disbelief.”
-
Mr. Hoffman,
“A prediction is not a promise, no matter how you spin it”
Does this also apply to all of the “predictions” the President has made concerning the Health Care legislation? I particularly ask about the cost savings projections,,err “predictions”of the Health Care legislation.
Does this also mean that all of the Team Obama “predictions” about Global Warming if Climate Change legislation is not passed are subject to the same 27% error rate that the unemployment “prediction” was?
Instead of calling the right wingers liars, who are holding this administration accountable, you should have just admitted that your hero’s economic team got their numbers wrong. Your side would have taken a short term hit, but longer term your credibility would still be intact.
President Obama already has a major problem with his believability. Your knee jerk reaction to legitimate criticism is not becoming, even for a Democrat.
-
Center Square,
“Actually, Alan, did you read the documentation you cited? It supports Ben’s position, not yours.”
Guilty.
I find the document boring and not easy to read. I merely picked out the relevant point, which was the graph projecting the unemployment rate with and with out the stimulus.
I think that you are losing sight of the purpose of Mr. Hoffman’s original post. It was to call right wingers liars. If the shoes were on the other hoofs you guys would be all over this. Admit it.
Again this report was used to sell the stimulus. Since it’s predictions have been off by 27%, it is legitimate to criticize it.
Also the jobs created or saved is so murky that it can’t be proven.
Do not forget that billions in tax dollars and millions in jobs are at stake when you are wrong.
Again these bad predictions put in to question all of the arguments this administration makes concerning cost reductions in health care and costs of global warming legislation.
In other words, as we right wingers have been saying since January, Obama is full of it.
-
You’re being politically disingenuous, Obama’s ADVISORS promised it: “The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan” from Christina Romer, chairwoman of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, the vice president’s top economic adviser. Their report projected that the stimulus plan proposed by Obama would create between three and four million jobs by the end of 2010. The report also includes a graphic predicting unemployment rates with and without the stimulus. Without the stimulus (the baseline), unemployment was projected to hit about 8.5 percent in 2009 and then continue rising to a peak of about 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8 percent in 2009.
And it didn’t happen.
By a long shot.
“Forecasts of the unemployment rate without the recovery plan vary substantially. Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action.”
But “action” got us practically the same result and we spend Billions we don’t have.
So where are the jobs? -
Mr. Hoffman,
“This is the lie: “Obama’s spending has resulted in a huge budget deficit.” You’re using the economic forecast to set up a straw-man. Try staying on topic.”
So the $787 billion stimulus had no effect on the deficit? Whatever you’re smoking, I have two.
-
The Center Square,
” Since the market low in March 2009, the value of the S&P 500 has risen by nearly $4 trillion. Kind of puts the stimulus package and TARP and Obama deficits into perspective, doesn’t it?”
Now you left wing Socialists think the stock market is important. When Republicans were in charge and the stock market did well you class warriors would say that all of that created wealth was only going to the rich and the Wall Streeters.
WELL that is happening more NOW than anytime in the last 9 years, Einstein. Wall Street profits are up because of job cuts. So under your hero Barak Hussein Obama, the average Joe has lost his job so that the investors can get rich. Gold man Sachs, the ultimate rich guy fat cats, have done very well in 09. Who was President again, during that time ?
Got answer to these facts?
-
I am getting tired of addressing the mindless comments on this board, though someone has to be the voice in the wilderness. Otherwise you folks merely repeat and amplify your own left wing ideas.
The way you excuse Obama’s PROMISES is amazing. The man says things and when they prove to be false, you still have faith in him. Well I give you credit for loyalty. That’s it.
There are natural cycles to economics. I know you people were not taught that in Karl Marx University. The economy should be well in to a natural recovery because a lot of the debt structures that helped cause the collapse are being unwound.
Do you like that phrase ” unwound “? If you had a background in anything financial you’d know it. Add to that the deflation that came with the recession and costs for businesses are down.
So why aren’t we further along in the recovery? Because businesses are frozen. They are afraid to hire. Obama-care and cap and tax has them scared to death about their future costs.
Mr. Hoffman, Economics 101. If you raise costs on business, you kill jobs. Maybe you could e-mail that fact to your Community Organizer Hero, who is running the country.
-
The Center Square,
“@ Alan: Actually, my application to KMU was rejected, so I had to settle for an MBA from the Kellogg School at Northwestern. Then, came my own professional experience owning a company of $40 million annual revenue and 900 employees. Maybe I can still dream — maybe KMU will confer an honorary degree on me later in life.”
What are you doing here? Don’t you have better things to do?
You don’t talk like one of the evil rich, but I bet you are. Did you give all of your 900 employees fully paid health care, you swine? I bet you didn’t. I bet you just live in your big mansion on the beach, and use your Chuck Berry to e-mail your slave drivers to crack the whip on the peons. :).
I am fully ready to sit at the grown ups table as soon as I find it. I’ll check out your stuff. I can’t quite figure you out. Either you are not being honest or you are one of those rich liberals who voted for Obama to ease your guilty conscience.
I don’t have those hang ups. I am not rich and I lost all of my liberal views when I got in to the real world and figured out who the BSers are.
-
The Center Square,
Ok, you are not the typical liberal who souls I’ve been trying to save from the hell fires of progressive BS.
I can’t see how you can call Pelosi and Rangel ( together with Boehner and Cantor ) useless wastes, and then be for Obama.
You are too much of a contradiction. I know the people on my side and I know the enemy ( everyone else almost on this board ), but you are trying to play the middle. To call me unthinking and then not ball out out everyone else here is a joke.
Just admit you are on the other side 100%.
-
Alan – I’m with Sleepygirl. There are contradictions everywhere. They appear regularly on this board but all that proves is that we’re all human. Life is full of compromise. Politics is called the ‘art of the compromise’. People cannot share the same planet without compromise.
We see what happens when they refuse to find their common humanity (Taliban anyone?). And not to go all Disney here, but we need to work together, instead of separating into tribes whose sole reason to be is to fight the other tribe.
We all better be more than that, or we’re sunk.
TCS has it right – the political class, with few exceptions, are not really on our side. They’re riding the euphoria of power and celebrity, where it’s all about them.
-
-
Mr. Hoffman,
“Alan, what’s your main source for news? Just curious.”
FoxNews of course. Throw in some Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck. Now this is just the everyday common news. When I need some intellectual firepower as say when I need a translation of the latest Obama speech, then I bring out the big guns. Charles Krauthammer is even better educated than Obama. He evolved from a liberal in to a conservative.
He knows all of the word tricks that you over educated, under intellectual Liberals substitute for clear thought. If some on this board would only read his columns, the quality of discourse would rise out of the abyss.
Then there is the Wall Street Journal, though I admit to not reading it very often lately. Lastly I subscribe to National Review magazine. Which is where I get an awful lot of facts that your side has never successfully disputed.
Oh, I left out one, because it is a negative. MSNBC. I watch them from time to time and just believe the exact opposite of whatever they spew.
The Arbourist,
“We had a version of libertarianism…it was called Feudalism (you can throw despotism in the mix as well), the logical endpoint of libertarianism.”
You really don’t have a clue what you are talking about, do you? Libertarians believe in minimal government. Feudalism is where a Monarch divides his Kingdom up among sub rulers. The two have nothing in common.
Despotism is absolute rule by one person, such as Stalin, Chavez, Castro, and Kim Jong-il. These were the logical endpoints of Socialism. They sure did not get their birth from Libertarians.
Perhaps you could give us all an example in world history where Libertarianism ended in despotism?
sleepygirl,
“Maybe if you stopped thinking of all of us as your enemies, we could actually find common ground.”
I am sure you are a very nice lady. However, we are absolutely bitter enemies in the arena of ideas. We are each sure that if the other side prevails, it will be the ruin of American civilization. Unless one of us surrenders their principles we will always be ideological foes.
-
Ms. Holland,
“And with that Alan, I quit even trying to engage with you. You sad, sad man.”
Sorry to hear that. What I try to engage in is honesty. It may be brutal.
-
Mr. Hoffman,
“No, you engage in battles of emotion. Honesty plays no role in your use of facts”
I don’t know, I guess what you are doing is called projection. You project on to me what you are guilty of.
You do this so that you and also Ms. Holland do not have to deal with what I say.
If I am full as of crap as you think, it should be very easy for an intelligent, educated, sophisticate such as yourself to take my so called facts and debunk them. If you can, I have no ego problem admitting I am wrong. I believe you have that problem.
So as I always say, take my words and prove me wrong.
-
Mr. Hoffman,
Turnabout is fair play. Where do you get your news from?
🙂
-
The Arbourist,
“But both Cuba and Venezuela have made great strides toward reducing human suffering despite vicious economic sanctions held in place at the behest of the United States. Why are they punished, because the system they chose to develop their nations was not capitalism. I would say both are doing great precisely because of the situation they are in (that is having a hegemonic power actively work for their downfall).”
I think you are leaving out relevant facts from your analysis. If Cuba and Venezuela were merely Socialist democracies such as Sweden or Germany, then you would be right. If the people continually vote themselves Socialism in open elections, then fine. Everyone has a right to be stupid.
You know that is not the case in Chavez and Castro land. They are dictatorships who oppress their people and destroy economies just to hang on to power.
To say that these countries are doing great and that all of their problems are because of the US persecution, betrays a colossal ignorance. Chavez has taken over much of the Venezuelan private economy and mismanaged it in to the ground.
The few parts that are still in private hands tend to be controlled by Chavezs’ friends and are totally corrupt. There was an article in yesterdays WSJ about how the gov. was seizing some private Venezuelan banks owned by a Chavez crony. They only did this finally to save them and protect the whole system from collapse. Yep they are doing great.
-
The Arbourist,
” Elections in Venezuela. Internationally monitored I might add as well.
Perhaps the US should give it a try. ”“The Venezuelan economy is doing as well as to be expected since the US initiated melt down. It certainly not being run into the ground as you opine. ”
This board is getting long and tired. I hope that I am not the only one here who finds these statements ridiculous.
You explain to me how fair elections can be when you silence your media critics.
You also apparently have no problem with a dictator who has no term limits.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/16/venezuela-presidential-term-limits-vote
He can indefinitely use the levers of power to buy the leadership.
-
The Arbourist,
“The Venezuelan economy is doing as well as to be expected since the US initiated melt down. It certainly not being run into the ground as you opine. ”
It most certainly is. Hugo Chavez has been fortunate because of the oil price boom of the last few years. He has been sucking money out of the oil industry to pay for his socialism and foreign adventurism. Much of Venezuelan oil is extra heavy and requires foreign investment to extract and process.
Hugo the clown has so angered foreign oil companies with his theft and corruption that now keeping foreign money and expertise is a problem going forward, in light of the collapse of oil prices.
As far as economic conditions, here are statistics.
Inflation 2005=16%, 2006=13.7%, 2007=18.7%, 2008=31.9%, 2009 projected =30%.
If you are interested in learning something about Venezuela, I will be happy to post 3 or 4 links to help you.
-
ML106,
Thank you for your support.