By Tierney Kain<\/p>\n
Oh god. <\/span>Oh GOD. <\/span><\/em>Our economy\u2019s NEVER been as bad as it is now. <\/span>Great Depression?! <\/span>Please. <\/span>Our current \u201cGreat Recession\u201d is much, much worse.<\/p>\n I mean\u2026our million dollar houses we bought with zero money down and refinanced six times are being foreclosed upon! <\/span>The dinners out and the DVD libraries we charged to our credit cards have resulted in insurmountable debt! <\/span>(Oh, those credit card companies are SO evil! <\/span>How dare<\/em> they charge us interest because we can\u2019t afford to pay for the second plasma screen television!?) <\/span><\/p>\n Yeah. <\/span>I\u2019m being sarcastic. <\/span><\/p>\n Just like how hating the military, valuing polar bears and trees more than babies, and embracing candidates who deem their \u201ccommunity organizational\u201d skills and campaign management as ample qualifications to be president have become the trendy things for people to do, possessing a deliberate pessimism about the economy is quickly gaining popularity.<\/p>\n Donald Luskin, an economist, had an excellent article<\/a> in this past Sunday\u2019s Washington Post<\/span>. <\/span>(\u201cQuit Doling Out That Bad Economy Line\u201d) <\/span>He makes the point, which I completely agree with, that a comparison between the financial situation now and what happened back in the early twentieth century is\u2026well\u2026stupid. <\/span>Back in January, the U.S News and World Report<\/em> Editor in Chief Mort Zuckerman said on \u201cThe McLaughlin Group\u201d that we as a nation \u201care facing the worst financial crunch and crisis since the Great Depression.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n Mr. Zuckerman is not alone in his fears. <\/span>In 2006, three major networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) all referenced the Great Depression or the recession a total of 49 times. <\/span>Mr. Luskin, in his Post<\/em> article, pointed out that in the past two months, the Washington Post<\/em> has written at least nine articles (news stories, op-eds, and columns) that \u201ckey elements of the economy are the worst they\u2019ve been \u2018since the Great Depression\u2019.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n You know something? <\/span>Even though they\u2019re wrong, I do admire those pessimists\u2019 determination in believing that we\u2019re in a horrible recession despite the proof of the opposite. <\/span>Recession occurs when there are two consecutive periods of negative growth. <\/span>Well, since last quarter we grew 3.3 percent, I\u2019m pretty sure all the references to our \u201cGreat Recession\u201d are ludicrous. <\/span>And, like Mr. Luskin states, 3.3 percent growth is pretty close to the 3.4 average growth rate since the infamous Great Depression.<\/p>\n So, pardon the Joker reference, but why so serious? <\/span>Why so insistent on telling the public that we\u2019re in such dire financial straits? <\/span>Why so set on depicting the current administration as the cause of the worst economical situation since a time when nearly half the country was without jobs and homes and meals? <\/span>Why? <\/span>How can you even claim such things?<\/p>\n Well, Obama did state in June that during a campaign speech that “percentage of homes in foreclosure and late mortgage payments is the highest since the Great Depression.” <\/span>That\u2019s a pretty big claim\u2026let\u2019s see if it\u2019s true. <\/span>Mr. Luskin cites the Mortgage Bankers Association database as evidence that Obama\u2019s claims were unfounded. <\/span>First of all, they\u2019ve only been keeping track of that kind of information since 1979. <\/span>Second, really, Obama? <\/span>Really!? <\/span>You\u2019re saying that foreclosures are the highest since the Great Depression? <\/span>That\u2019s a dumb comparison. <\/span>\u201cAccording to the MBA, 6.4 percent of mortgages are delinquent to some extent, and 2.75 percent are in foreclosure.\u201d <\/span>You\u2019re comparing 6.4 percent to the excess of 50 percent during the Great Depression?<\/p>\n That\u2019 s really some pretty dedicated pessimism. <\/span>I\u2019ve been hearing recent claims that my girl Palin is a liar, but Obama\u2019s not so innocent either. <\/span>On Obama\u2019s official campaign website, he says that “the personal savings rate is now the lowest it’s been since the Great Depression.” <\/span>Why make comments like that when obvious proof is lying around? <\/span>Mr. Luskin continues to make his point, stating that \u201cThe latest rate<\/a>, for the second quarter of 2008, is 2.6 percent — higher than the 1.9 percent rate that prevailed in the last quarter<\/a> of Bill Clinton<\/a>‘s presidency.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n So, if Obama is wrong about that, what else is he wrong about?<\/p>\n I can\u2019t stress enough how amazing Mr. Luskin\u2019s article was. <\/span>(Translation: <\/span>Go read it. <\/span>Now<\/a>. <\/span>Don\u2019t wait. <\/span>The last thing I want to do is reiterate every single point he made, but they\u2019re all so perfect and so relevant. <\/span>If Obama\u2019s not a liar when it comes to the economy, then he\u2019s majorly misinformed and blindly believes that misinformation without doing the research, which is just as bad. <\/span>I\u2019m ranting. <\/span>Sorry.) <\/span><\/p>\n The article goes on to outline all the misconceptions about our current economical situation, and then this little gem: <\/span>\u201cThis would suggest that anyone who says we’re in a recession, or heading into one — especially the worst one since the Great Depression — is making up his own private definition of “recession.” And probably for his own political purposes. <\/span>McCain campaign adviser and former U.S. senator <\/em>Phil Gramm<\/em><\/a> was right in July when he said that our current state “is a mental recession.” Maybe he was out of line when he added that the United States has become “a nation of whiners.” But when it comes to the economy, we have surely become a nation of exaggerators.\u201d <\/span><\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Nicely put, Mr. Luskin. <\/span>And, just like it\u2019s \u201cpolitical suicide\u201d to disagree with global warming or support the war, it\u2019s become taboo to disagree with the fact that our economy is in dire straits. <\/span>Even my man McCain brushed off Mr. Gramm\u2019s aforementioned statement, making a joke out of it. <\/span>Why? <\/span>I believe it\u2019s because people are so intent on making Bush the reason for every negative thing that happens. <\/span>(My friend Chuck made me laugh when he said sarcastically that his hot water stopped working. <\/span>It must be Bush.) <\/span>Because most of society\u2019s fingers are pointing at Bush for causing our \u201cGreat Recession\u201d, for McCain to admit that numbers don\u2019t lie would be super unpopular. <\/span>Come on, Maverick! <\/span>We already knew Obama\u2019s got no balls, but I have faith in you!<\/span><\/p>\n Okay. <\/span>Moving on. <\/span>So, we\u2019ve just established that Obama is either a liar or horrible misinformed when it comes to our current economy. <\/span>How\u2019s he going to fix it? <\/span>What is going to be the great \u201cchange\u201d he rhapsodizes about every chance he gets?<\/span><\/p>\n I giggled my way through Bill O\u2019Reilly\u2019s interview with the Democratic nominee on September 8. <\/span>(The transcript can be found here<\/a>.) <\/span>Basically, Obama\u2019s plan for us if he gets elected is to cut taxes for 95 percent of the country and raise them for the top 5 percent. <\/span>After all, they\u2019re rich. <\/span>They can afford it. <\/span>Mr. O\u2019Reilly disagrees, calling the plan \u201cclass warfare.\u201d <\/span>“You’re taking the wealthy in America, the big earners . . . you’re taking money away from them and you’re giving it to people who don’t. That’s called income redistribution. It’s a socialist tenet. Come on, you know that. <\/span>You went to Harvard.\u201d <\/span>Heh. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Obama\u2019s response is that it\u2019s our job, our neighborly duty<\/em>, to redistribute our wealth. <\/span>\u201c”If I am sitting pretty and you’ve got a waitress who is making minimum wage plus tips, and I can afford it and she can’t, what’s the big deal for me to say, I’m going to pay a little bit more? That’s neighborliness.”\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n <\/span>Jeff Jacoby\u2019s op-ed<\/a> \u201cSeeing Through Obamanomics\u201d has plenty to say about Obama\u2019s insistence on doing our \u201cduty\u201d. <\/span>So do I. <\/span>I\u2019ll let him go first, and then I\u2019ll say what I think.<\/span><\/p>\n \u201c\u2019Neighborliness.\u2019 Perhaps that word has a nonstandard meaning to someone whose home adjoined the property of <\/span><\/em>convicted swindler Tony Rezko<\/em><\/a>, but extracting money by force from someone who earned it in order to give it to someone who didn’t is not usually spoken of as neighborly. If Citizen Obama, “sitting pretty,” reaches into his own pocket and helps out the waitress with a large tip, he has shown a neighborly spirit. But there is nothing neighborly about using the tax code to compel someone else to pay the waitress that tip.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n Taxation is not generosity, it is confiscation at gunpoint. Does Obama not understand the difference?\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n Uh\u2026yeah! <\/span>And, I\u2019m going to add my two cents. <\/span>I was that waitress making 2.13 plus tips, and it sucked. <\/span>A lot. <\/span>I waitressed for about three years. <\/span>But, I never felt that the wealthy business man should have tipped me more just because he had more money. <\/span>I just expected my twenty<\/em> percent (which is what you should tip for good service. <\/span>NOT FIFTEEN. <\/span>I\u2019ll rant about that maybe another day..). <\/span>So, according to Obama, the richer customers should have tipped me more simply because I had a crappy job and they didn\u2019t? <\/span>Sorry. <\/span>I don\u2019t agree. <\/span>Yeah, the extra money would have rocked, but it seems unfair. <\/span>Obama\u2019s tax plan is kind of like turning America into a big restaurant. <\/span>The richer you are, the more you\u2019re supposed to tip because you can<\/em>. <\/span>Who cares that it\u2019s your<\/em> money that you<\/em> worked for? <\/span>Who cares that you worked those same minimum wage jobs, and eventually all that hard work paid off? <\/span>No. <\/span>No one cares. <\/span>If you worked hard for your money, then the government has every right to take it away from you and give it to the poor minimum wage people.<\/span><\/p>\n It\u2019s not fair. <\/span>I absolutely do not support a President who wants to fulfill childhood fantasies of being Robin Hood. <\/span>Taking money from the rich to give to the poor may sound nice, but in the end, it\u2019s still thievery. <\/span>Forcing me to tip that metaphorical waitress more (read pay more taxes) because of my income, and throwing me in jail if I don\u2019t is wrong<\/em>. <\/span>Obama\u2019s PR skills kind of suck in that regard. <\/span>Telling me I\u2019m being a good neighbor by forcibly taking my money and giving it to others and throwing me in jail if I don\u2019t doesn\u2019t exactly make me feel better.<\/span><\/p>\n And, until the possibility of the Presidency arose, Obama wasn\u2019t neighborly in the least. <\/span>Jacoby shows the proof in his article: <\/span>\u201cBarack and Michelle Obama’s <\/em>tax returns<\/em><\/a> show that from 2000 through 2004, when their adjusted gross income averaged nearly a quarter of a million dollars a year, their annual charitable donations amounted to just $2,154 – less than nine-tenths of 1 percent. Not until he entered the US Senate in 2005 and began to be spoken of as a presidential possibility did the Obamas’ “neighborliness” become more evident. (In 2005-2007, they gave 5.5 percent of their income to charity.)\u201d<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n So, if Obama is a liar (or grossly misinformed) and<\/em> a hypocrite when it comes to our economical situation and our \u201cneighborly duties\u201d, how can we really trust this guy to run our country?<\/span><\/p>\n Somebody was asking me today about why I became so passionate and interested in politics, specifically this election. <\/span>I remember months and months ago, I was on the elliptical trainer at Gold\u2019s Gym \u201cworking on my fitness\u201d. <\/span>(Oh Fergie. <\/span>Heh.) <\/span>Obama was speaking on TV, and since I was stuck on my machine, I was forced to watch him. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n He was talking about the credit card \u201ccrisis\u201d, and then he said that he wanted to help save Americans from the \u201cpredatory\u201d credit card companies who were forcing them deeper and deeper into debt. <\/span>That was the first time I ever actually cared about something political. <\/span>I remember actually laughing out loud and being like, \u201cReally?! <\/span>This dude is blaming the credit card companies for Americans\u2019 debt?!\u201d <\/span>The idea was so laughably stupid, and so transparent in trying to get those American debtors\u2019 votes that I went home and had to say something to my father, who has a mind like a computer and is pretty much the smartest man I know. <\/span>(He also could beat up your dad. <\/span>And he would be the ideal presidential candidate.) <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Thus, my interest in politics was sparked. <\/span>Please explain to me how Obama can blame credit card companies for keeping people in debt?! <\/span>How can you base a huge part of your campaign on something you voted to SUPPORT?! <\/span>Yes. <\/span>That\u2019s right. <\/span>In 2005, Obama actually voted \u201cNAY\u201d on a bill that would freeze credit card rates at no higher than 30%. <\/span>(Really interesting article here<\/a> that addresses Obama\u2019s credit card hypocrisy and shows that, as of when it was published in January, Obama\u2019s second biggest bloc of donors are those same \u201cpredatory\u201d credit card companies!)<\/span><\/p>\n And, secondly, no one forced credit cards into those peoples\u2019 hands. <\/span>No one MADE them buy a bigger house, and nicer cars, and more expansive wardrobes! <\/span>You sign<\/em> an agreement that informs you of the interest rates should you buy more than you can afford, and now you\u2019re whining that you\u2019re deep in debt? <\/span>Obama, you know<\/em> that, but you still transparently cater to these people who spent themselves into massive debt? <\/span>\u201cOh. <\/span>It\u2019s okay. <\/span>Your bad. <\/span>Here, start all over and keep all your shiny toys. <\/span>Hurray!\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Ugh. <\/span>Double ugh<\/em>. <\/span>I\u2019m digressing from my main point. <\/span>I tend to ramble. <\/span>Forgive me. <\/span>So, in conclusion, Obama is hopelessly wrong when it comes to solving our economy issues. <\/span>Taking from the rich and giving to the poor isn\u2019t the solution. <\/span>It\u2019s socialism. <\/span>(And, we all know what socialism is one step down from\u2026)<\/span><\/p>\n I mean, really, people, if we\u2019re taking Obama at his word, how could we not<\/em> vote for him? <\/span>I mean, he\u2019s promising health insurance for everyone, peace all over the world, and no more home foreclosures ever! <\/span>He\u2019s promising we can all get rid of our credit card debt. <\/span>Hooray! <\/span>Like, I\u2019ve totally heard someone say that it means that we\u2019ll <\/em>have to pay higher taxes to accomplish this, but hello<\/em>! <\/span>Obama never said anything about higher taxes! <\/span>I mean, he must be getting the money from somewhere magical, because I know I don\u2019t have any extra cash to pay for all this! <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n Obama wants to create a world where nobody has to take responsibility for their actions. <\/span>Why are a majority of these foreclosures and mortgage \u201ccatastrophes\u201d taking place? <\/span>Well, a big part of it is that when the housing market was amazing in 2001, people decided to buy excessive houses and put zero money down and have low-interest loans. <\/span>Then, they remortgaged and remortgaged and spent too much and melted their credit cards, and now they\u2019re trying to place the blame on other people? <\/span>Perhaps that\u2019s too simplified, but it\u2019s the overall idea. <\/span>People spent money they didn\u2019t have, and now that they\u2019re actually expected to pay it back (with the interest they AGREED to), they\u2019re freaking out? <\/span>But, it\u2019ll be okay in Obama\u2019s world. <\/span>In Obama\u2019s world, the government should bail out all the bankrupt companies and the bankrupt people. <\/span>In Obama\u2019s world, everyone should be paid the same, no matter their job. <\/span>In Obama\u2019s world, if equal pay for everyone doesn\u2019t happen, then we should redistribute the wealth so that everyone gets equal money. <\/span>In Obama\u2019s world, everyone\u2019s going to get everything they ever wanted, and where all the money comes from is not important. <\/span>In Obama\u2019s world, universal health care is much more important than national security. <\/span>(What\u2019s the point in keeping our citizens healthy if they\u2019re getting blown up all the time?)<\/span><\/p>\n I\u2019ll concede that Obama has some good ideas. <\/span>Yes. <\/span>If everyone could have free health care, that\u2019d be awesome. <\/span>Yes, if there was no more war ever, that\u2019d be great. <\/span>Yes, if everybody got to be rich and not work for it, that\u2019d be amazing.<\/span><\/p>\n