Here it comes:
President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending “unsustainable,” warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.
“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”
Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”
Translation: There are massive tax increases coming, on top of the ones already threatened on energy, sodas, Gatorade, cigarets, booze, beer, chips. And also on top of the taxes promised on “the rich,” corporations, etc.
Shorter translation: “I’m going to tax you bastards back to the Stone Age.”
Addendum: “You’re all bastards, every single one of you.”
You are right on there my fried. You know the big O is not going to cut government programs nor limit spending. So the only way to change the debt problem is to tax the living crap out of everyone and everything. Get ready my fellow Americans, time is running short.
Yep, he’s going to punish us… because he hates America, his pastor told him to “damn” America, or (c) all of his parents abandoned him in childhood, so he’s really, really angry inside.
That is for sure.
No one is going to be safe from incoming federal tax hikes. But hey, at least those dreaded Credit Card companies won’t charge you those hidden fees and raise your interest rates, that money will go to the fed gov’t to cover all the social spending and it still won’t be enough. For all those who voted for President Obama and they thought he was another President Clinton (moderate) they were sadly mistaken. Start buying gold if you can.
He’s complaining about unsustainable debt after the budget he proposed?
Weird.
Either we’re going to have more taxes or less government. That’s easy enough for everyone to grasp. Easy credit is dependent on sustained economic growth, and that growth is going to come from what, exactly?
We are, as we have been for many years now, fucked. It’s just now that most people are starting to realize it. Obama is no more a cause than Bush, who started it no more than Clinton, who only did a slightly less bad job than the first Bush and Reagan. Meanwhile, we Americans ate it up and demanded the impossible: easy credit, unsustainable consumerism, and low taxes. Now we can’t even choose two out of three. I’m not certain we can have one of those three.
Lower taxes frees more capital, which creates more investment and jobs, which creates more taxpayers, which actually brings in more revenue not less. It’s been proven over and over again. Like more products sell when the prices are lower.
Gee, it’s like he’s TRYING to ruin the country.
Decisions, decisions…
Gold will do you no good.
Guns, ammo, clean water and fuel will be the comodities in demand.
Can we just have one person feeding Obama’s teleprompter all these conflicting messages are giving me a headache
McGeehee,
Isn’t it just great that we have two political parties unified under the stupid notion that cutting government is impossible? Isn’t it also wonderful that tax increases are just as unthinkable?
I’m completely with you in our shared answer of “Fuck No!”
Still, when idiotic proposals are countered by idiotic platitudes, it’s not hard for Obama to look like the smartest guy in the room. When two drunks get into a fight, the drunk with a plan wins. I’m not saying Obama really has much of a plan, but I am saying that the Republicans look like they’re still trying to drunkenly impress some oblivious women or their equally drunken buddies rather than realize that they’re in a fight. And that’s the best analogy I can come up with for the political discourse in the country. A drunken brawl perfectly describes a scenario where one side is batshit insane with money while the other is putting out attack ads about the First Puppy.
There’s a reason the GOP has become known — mostly, it seems to me, among its own base — as The Stupid Party.
It used to be that your own party was the Stupid Party while the opposition was the Evil Party, but now it seems like we’ve only got the Stupid Evil Party and the Evil Stupid Party.
It’s almost as if we’re so far past the part where we argue if the People’s Popular Front is better than the Popular Front for People and are now fixated on whether or not Stan’s right to have babies is really the question of our time. Me? I’m all for it, provided the box is recyclable.
Which brings me to my biggest complaint about those who want our major parties to “get along.” If you’re the prairie dog, it doesn’t really matter if the buffalo herd trampling your burrow is fighting or mating.
demanded the impossible: easy credit, unsustainable consumerism, and low taxes.
Why list those together? Nothing about easy credit makes consumerism less sustainable or low taxes less feasible; “unsustainable consumerism” is not sustainable (it’s right there in the phrase) regardless of the status of credit or taxes; and low taxes can facilitate easy credit by fostering economic growth, so long as spending is also kept low to keep government borrowing from depleting available credit.
Obama is no more a cause than Bush, who started it no more than Clinton, who only did a slightly less bad job than the first Bush and Reagan.
If you were interested in writing that sentence honestly, you could have either ended with, “…than Clinton, who did not begin it any more than the first Bush and Reagan”, or you could have started with, “Obama is doing a vastly worse job than Bush, who did much worse than Clinton….”
Isn’t it also wonderful that tax increases are just as unthinkable?
You mean the higher top income tax bracket, the carbon tax, increasing taxes on foreign operations of US corporations, the soda pop tax, raising the death tax to pre-Bush levels, the capital gains tax hike, the various other taxes on the energy sector, or something else?
I guess, bgates, I meant whatever combination of taxes would come even close to paying for as much government as is being financed. Sure, there are some little tax increases here and some little tax increases there, but compared to what they’re supposedly paying for, it’s like getting a part time job at McDonald’s to finance a Maserati for the teenage son.
As for unsustainable consumerism, we did need easy credit to buy beyond our means. If we paid for everything with cash, our consumerism wouldn’t be impossible (as you seem to have implied that I implied,) but would certainly be at a much more balanced level. We’d still buy a lot of crap, but much less of it on credit.
As for your criticism of my criticism of various Presidents, you certainly got my point that they all sucked. We can quibble on the details, choose to blame Reagan or Johnson or even Nixon if you wish, or even a certain Congress along the way as the one that started it, but the fact remains that this isn’t anything new. The scale is now akin to World War Two budgets, but few would compare the issues facing us as similar.
Apparently Obama is under the impression that debt is bad . . . well, unless you want to drop a few trillion on your children’s plate.
I think Obama is having a Costanza moment: he believes he can get away with anything as long as he goes on TeeVee beforehand and says he’s going to do exactly the opposite.
And to me, what’s even more sad than people who can’t imagine taxes being lower are those of us—most of us, unfortunately—can’t envision anything other than pay as you go taxation to fund the state. We can come to be a Zero-Tax Society.
I think the big reason Bammie is rolling this rhetoric out is to justify his national healt care proposals. He will say it is necessary to get spending under control. It is BS, of course, but…