Obama's 100 Days: The Scariest Chart I've Ever Seen

Human Events ^ | May. 1, 2009 | Mark Skousen

[Reagan Man]

Much has been made of the comparison of Barrick Hussein Obama and Franklin Delano Roosevelt and need for quick action in the first 100 days. Winning a popular election and enjoying heavy majorities in both houses of Congress, FDR declared a national bank holiday, took us off the gold standard and confiscated Americans gold coins, raised taxes on the rich, and began a series of anti-business measures.

Obama has acted quickly too: He pushed through a partisan $800 billion plus “stimulus” package, devalued the dollar (de facto), and introduced legislation to raise taxes sharply on wealthy entrepreneurs and investors. He also announced plans to withdraw the majority of troops from Iraq (while increasing them in Afghanistan), close Guantanamo Bay detention camp for alleged Islamic terrorists, and signed an executive order funding stem cell research.

But that’s just the beginning. The heavy lifting starts after the 100 days are up, when the President puts forth his agenda on health care, entitlement reform, and climate change. He wants to impose a “cap and trade” charge on energy producers, which will indirectly increase the cost of electricity, gasoline and utilities on average Americans; pass the “card check” legislation that will boost the power of unions and significantly raise the cost of doing business; and create a new national health care system that will cause additional pain and suffering on the American taxpayer and health care providers.

Wall Street has had a mixed reaction so far to Obama’s policies. The stock market had a rocky start with Obama, falling sharply and then recovering since early March. The Dow is up 20% from its lows, but still down for the year. Will the recovery on Wall Street last? Much depends on whether Obama’s next 100 days sees major legislation pass which might encumber the American economy and risk-taking.

The Scariest Picture of All: Federal Spending Out of Control

The biggest headache facing the Obama administration is the unprecedented growth in government deficit spending. This chart below shows how bad things could get in the near future.

This the scariest chart I’ve ever seen. It makes President George W. Bush look like a piker.

Tax receipts have fallen sharply even as government spending has increased dramatically.

Moreover, if the economy recovers, watch out for huge increases in interest rates, which will make the deficit even worse.

The silver lining in all this bad news is that it has re-energized the freedom movement. Conservatives have always done better as minorities, fighting the good cause against big government. Let the fight begin.

But let us not lose the battle with extremist talk, such as red-baiting (calling Obama a “radical Marxist” or worse does us no good) or announcing to the world that the best solution to the financial crisis is to “do nothing.” We do have a positive program for laissez faire -- cutting corporate income taxes (we have the highest rates among industrial nations), eliminating bad accounting rules, imposing a simple flat tax like Hong Kong, or adopting a stable banking system like Canada or New Zealand.

---

[gunnyg]

related....

http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2009/05/01/obama-received-aid-as-a-foreign-student-ref-rensecom/

[DoughtyOne]

I do reference the ‘isms’ that our pres__ent loves to rule like. I mention this because a lot of people simply don’t know. For instance, Fascism isn’t something that flies across most people’s radar. Obama is miring himself and our nation down into it. His hands on ‘management’ of the corporations is not kosher.

[Clint Williams]

Conservatives have always done better as minorities, fighting the good cause against big government.

Reactionaries, with little staying power.

America -- a great idea, didn't last.

[InterceptPoint]

The chart dramatically demonstrates how successful the 9/11 attack on the U.S. actually was. It hurt the economy in the short run, it required us to run deficits in order to increase our defense spending and this in turn led to a 6 year long (and continuing) Democrat campaign to discredit "Bush's War".

And that delivered Obama and his huge and destructive spending initiatives on the American people. It hard for me to disagree that Bin Laden has succeeded in damaging this country far beyond his wildest dreams.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

But let us not lose the battle with extremist talk, such as red-baiting (calling Obama a “radical Marxist” or worse does us no good)

Wrong! Labeling such words as "extremist" does us no good. A reasoned use of the terms fascist and communist in relation to Obama's policies is appropriate.

Is Mr. Skousen implying that FDR avoided using the terms Fascist when speaking of Hitler and Mousellini? Did JFK shy away from rightly identifying the communists of Vietnam, Red China and NorKo?

[DuncanWaring]

...Bin Laden has succeeded in damaging this country far beyond his wildest dreams.

It wasn't bin Laden - it was the Trojan-horse Democrat party. These wounds are inflicted from within.

[InterceptPoint]

It wasn't bin Laden - it was the Trojan-horse Democrat party. These wounds are inflicted from within.

No doubt.

But Bin Laden pulled the trigger that allowed that Democrat Trojan-horse to be launched. A lucky shot by Bin Laden for sure.

[DakotaRed]

"But let us not lose the battle with extremist talk, such as red-baiting (calling Obama a “radical Marxist” or worse does us no good) or announcing to the world that the best solution to the financial crisis is to “do nothing.”"

Speaking "truth to power" is out of fashion in conservatives?

What do they suggest, more McCainisms?

[Salvation]

For later.

[VTenigma]

That thought has been running around my head for 102 days now

[lucysmom]

A reasoned use of the terms fascist and communist in relation to Obama's policies is appropriate.

Fascism and communism are not the same and can't rationally be used interchangeably.

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

Ya missed my point...

[DuncanWaring]

But Bin Laden pulled the trigger ...

It's my opinion that the trigger was actually pulled when al-Gore tried to steal the 2000 election and his minions wouldn't believe that their guy had actually been beaten by that "dummy from Texas".

[Two Kids' Dad]

According to census estimates, there are 12 states with fewer than 1.75 million people.

So the amount of money representing this year’s deficits would be enough to make every person in any one of those states a millionaire if it were surplus dollars. It’s enough to make millionaires of all the residents of two states if we only counted the least populous 6 states.

Or, to state it in its proper context, you could create a big wheel with Idaho, Maine, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Rhode Island, Montana, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming on it, then spin the wheel and demand a million dollars from every single person in the state it lands on... and still not have enough to get the budget to balance.

Pretty sick!

[sanchmo]

This is still a relatively optimistic scenario.

This CBO estimate assumes that existing stimulus and bailouts are sufficient to return the economy to relatively normal growth rates within a couple of years, and also excludes their recent (2 weeks ago) downward revision of social security budget to show that we may have an additional shortfall in 2010 & 2011, and will be permanently in the red starting in 2017 (not 2045 as previously thought). That is still an optimistic scenario. A pessimistic scenario would add an additional $2-3T due to shortfalls in mandatory spending, FDIC, more bailouts & stimulus, plus new spending for nationalized healthcare & energy programs, and perhaps even an unexpected expensive war or natural disaster. And it may also anticipate much mor esluggish growth - more similar to Japan in the 1990’s and 2000’s than to the US in the 1980s-1990s.

CBO’s optimistic estimate above = gross national debt at 120% GDP, debt held by public 65% of GDP by 2020. More pessimistic scenario = gross national debt over 150% GDP, debt held by public 85% of GDP.

Note that the generally accepted guideline is that:
1. When debt held by the public exceeds 50%-60% of GDP (CBO’s optimistic scenario), government can do very little to prevent/stop a downturn, because stimulus & monetary expansion have a negative ROI.
2. When debt held by the public exceeds 70%-80% of GDP, countries have no effective recourse to protect themselves against malicious currency attacks.

[SueRae]

Note the convenient reductions in election year 2012. Plan on it. with the short memory of a large part of the electorate, they will only remember what feels good today. This has to stay in the forefront. although as interest rates climb, it may take care of itself. But also remeber that the ‘stimuls’ was to be doled out in tranches, not that any of that money release would be timed to coincide with election years. Nahhhhh.