Posts tagged ‘Democrat’
Hey, as long as our government is taking care of the communist countries, right? This economy is not fine, it’s not “fundamentally sound” as McCain says…it needs change (badly!) As I’ve said before (Part I, Part II), the Democrats are now the Fiscally Responsible Party.
The Republicans are more concerned with Big Business than Americans; more concerned with Communist and Persian Gulf countries than America.
Feds bailed out China, not the US
- The deal adds $5 trillion in debt to an already stressed national balance sheet. That basically doubles the U.S. national debt and can’t help but push the U.S. dollar lower and U.S. interest rates higher in the long term. The U.S. government is going to have to sell more Treasury bonds to cover its new debt.
- Taxpayers are on the hook for somewhere between $25 billion and $200 billion. That’s money that will have to come from higher taxes or from more government debt.
- The need to sell more debt to fund this takeover will lead to higher interest rates in the Treasury market. (This is besides the rising tide of the annual federal debt. The Congressional Budget Office puts the deficit at $407 billion for fiscal 2008 and a record $438 billion for fiscal 2009.) Treasury yields are the benchmark for everything from mortgages to credit cards to corporate loans. Higher interest rates on Treasurys will push up mortgage and other interest rates.
- The combination of faster growth in the money supply — as the government sells more bonds — and a weaker dollar will add to forces pushing inflation higher in the United States.
- The decay in the financial fundamentals of the U.S. government could finally lead to the United States’ loss of its triple-A debt rating. A downgrade would force the U.S. to pay higher interest on its debt.
- Higher interest rates will lead to lower economic growth. The Federal Reserve calculates the U.S. economy can grow at 2.5% or so before it risks setting off inflation. The extra debt burden from this takeover will make it hard for U.S. growth to hit even that relatively modest target.
- And, yes, after being asleep for years as the problem grew and grew, the Treasury may not have had any alternative if it wanted to prevent an immediate meltdown in the U.S. mortgage market and in the U.S. financial system in general. But if the Treasury is serious about starting to shrink the mortgage obligations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac starting in 2010, the price of an immediate fix could be a double-dip slowdown in the housing industry in 2010. Less mortgage money available from Fannie and Freddie in 2010 sure isn’t going to help the housing industry sell houses.
Good for them
For China, on the other hand, the results of the takeover are almost uniformly positive:
- The rescue bails out the banks and central banks that had put too much money into mortgage paper backed by Fannie and Freddie. At the end of 2007, Chinese banks held $376 billion in what the financial markets call agency debt.
- Now the commercial banks in China — and the Chinese government — don’t have to worry about problems at Fannie and Freddie turning into problems on their balance sheets. Chinese banks are now free, therefore, to make more risky, ill-considered loans to domestic companies.
- The People’s Bank of China can forget about the yuan appreciating too quickly, which would increase the cost of Chinese goods and cut into Chinese exports. Now the Chinese government can manage its exchange rate without worrying that buying more dollars to depress the price of the yuan would increase its exposure to something like a meltdown at Fannie or Freddie.
- The U.S. intervention into its financial markets clears the way for the Chinese to intervene as deeply as they want without any foreign criticism. Who can say the Beijing government shouldn’t intervene to prop up Chinese real-estate prices after what the U.S. government just did? Chinese real estate has suffered an even worse drop than U.S. housing prices, with some cities showing a 70% drop from their peaks.
- Pro-growth advocates in China just got another boost. China’s advocates of fiscal discipline and the need to fight inflation were probably fighting a losing battle anyway, since politicians everywhere are reluctant to risk the wrath of the unemployed just to cut a percentage point out of inflation. Recent actions and speeches out of Beijing indicate the government is gradually revving up the growth engine again. More-radical pro-growth officials have also advocated new policies that would prop up the prices of stocks and real estate. The huge U.S. intervention to prop up real-estate, bond and stock prices helps make their case.
PALIN: “The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.”
THE FACTS: Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MCCAIN: “She’s been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America’s energy supply … She’s responsible for 20 percent of the nation’s energy supply. I’m entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America,” he said in an interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson.
THE FACTS: McCain’s phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she’s no more “responsible” for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state – by population.
MCCAIN: “She’s the commander of the Alaska National Guard. … She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities,” he said on ABC.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under “federal status,” which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska’s national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
HUCKABEE: Palin “got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States.”
THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor’s election. She got 909 in her 1999 re-election race. This is a combined total of 1,525. Biden dropped out of the race after the Iowa caucuses, but he still got 76,165 votes during the 2008 presidential primaries.
ROMNEY: “We need change, all right – change from a liberal Washington to a conservative Washington! We have a prescription for every American who wants change in Washington – throw out the big-government liberals, and elect John McCain and Sarah Palin.”
THE FACTS: A Back-to-the-Future moment. George W. Bush, a conservative Republican, has been president for nearly eight years. And until last year, Republicans controlled Congress. Only since January 2007 have Democrats have been in charge of the House and Senate.
Does it get any easier than this: Lawmakers agree to ban toxins in kids’ items
“Concerns over lead and other toxins in toys have prompted lawmakers to call for a ban on a class of chemicals used in many children’s products.
Congressional negotiators agreed Monday to a ban on a family of toxins found in children’s products, handing a major victory to parents and health experts who have been clamoring for the government to remove harmful chemicals from toys.”
Slam Dunk. What’s easier than banning harmful chemicals in the toys of children? It’s ‘done’, right? Well… not so fast.
George W. Bush’s White House opposes the bill and according to White House spokesman Tony Fratto “it is too early to say whether he will veto the measure”.
Ahh, yes… Bush. Cheney. The Rebulican adminitration. (Cue the Darth Vader music). The GOP is throwing around the “veto” on a bill to keep toxins out of toys.
And don’t count out the special interests – the role that big business plays in writing American law. The chemical industry launched a big campaign against the Toxins-in-Toys ban in the House.
“The campaign was led by Exxon Mobil, which manufacturers diisononyl phthalate, or DINP, the phthalate most frequently found in children’s toys. The company spent a chunk of its $22 million lobbying budget in the past 18 months to try to prevent any ban.”
Another example of Democrats speaking for citizens and Republicans speaking for industry.
“Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I’m looking at one right now.”
Check out this article on Clinton and the ex-parrot from the Python skit: This is an ex-candidate
I Want Barack!
Obama Girl – Crush on Obama
Yes We Can
Obama Girl – Stop the Attacks
Obama Girl Returns
We Are the Ones