US:Obama quadrupling of deficit is Crazonomics- a recipe for disaster

In President Obama's first year in office the deficit is expected to reach $1.75 trillion. In President Bush's last year in office, 2008, the deficit reached $459 billion. So Obama is quadrupling the deficit. This is voodoo economics at its best. Oh certainly Obama has bought change to America but it is change for the worse.

In addition he is endeavouring to introduce a healthcare plan, which is financially unsustainable. Meanwhile inflation is set to take off. Taxation must rise to fund this Crazonomics. China has begun to question the size of the deficit and is no longer prepared to sign a blank cheque.
America may have a slight upturn but the long-term prognosis for the US economy is frightening unless the deficit is tackled immediately. Being master of the teleprompter is no substitute for economic expertise.

America has the worst of all worlds now. A big spending-economically illiterate Democratic President and big spending Democrat controlled Congress, which is addicted to pork barrel spending.

Thankfully the Republican Party has begun to learn the lesson that there is no such thing as a free lunch and is now preaching fiscal rectitude. It has begun to go back to basics.
Once Obama passes the 24 month period in office he will be in the run in to the 2012 presidential election. It is safe to argue that if he fails to tackle the deficit within the next 12 months, nothing will be done in 2011 and 2012. Of course foreign lenders may force his hand and refuse to fund the deficit. Then the US economy will bomb.

Ireland-Huge coup for FG as George Lee opts to contest Dublin South by-election for the party

The decision of RTEs economics editor George Lee to seek the FG nomination at the Dublin South Convention on tomorrow night is significant on many counts.

Assuming that he is selected on tomorrow night (a foregone conclusion) he will make a powerful candidate. Up to now Labour's Alex White was perceived as the front runner. However FG has a strong chance of now winning this seat as George Lee is a polished media performer. Whilst FF secured 40% of the vote in the 2007 general election, it is highly unlikely that it can hold its share of the first preference vote even with Shay Brennan as the likely candidate. Dublin South is largely a middle class constituency and is thus particularly suitable for a Lee candidature. Middle Class voters have been hammered in the budgets and a sizeable majority of middle class voters are disillusioned. Lee has never pulled his punches on the Irish economy and had continuously warned-before the housing crash- about excessive government expenditure and over reliance on the property market as a source of taxation. Consequently he starts with a formidable pedigree.

The election of George Lee would send shivers down the government benches as his forensic questioning on economic matters would put government ministers under intense pressure.

George Lee will further increase the level of economic expertise at the disposal of the FG party. Front benchers Richard Bruton, Kieran O’Donnell and Leo Varadkar are already a formidable trio on economic matters.

Lee’s decision increases the electability of the party as it can argue convincingly that it has the level of economic expertise needed to rule the country.

It further boosts morale in the run in to the European Elections and the two Dublin by-elections.

It also increases the likelihood of a further influx of talent into the party as it is on an upward curve.

No wonder Enda Kenny is smiling.

Ireland: FG Finance Spokesman Richard Bruton and Simon Coveney TD attack FF supplementary budget impact on Middle Class and Families-7/4/09

Families Pay the Price for Fianna Fáil's Failures - Bruton

No Jobs Plan as Dole Queues Set to Hit 520,000 in 2010

Banks & Speculators Bailed out with €90bn Gamble of Taxpayers Money

Ordinary families are being hammered with today's Budget and are being made to pay for Fianna Fáil's failures on the economy, according to Fine Gael Deputy Leader & Finance Spokesman, Richard Bruton TD. He also pointed out that there was no serious plan to protect and create jobs, despite the fact that the Government were expecting 520,000 people to be on the dole queues next year. In addition the creation of a new asset management agency for toxic debt represented a €90 billion gamble with taxpayers' money to bail out banks and property developers.

"Many families will be brought to their knees by the taxes and levies imposed in this budget. Fine Gael proposed a savings programme of €3.5 billion split 1/3rd on tax increases, 2/3rds on spending controls. This Budget does the reverse and results in ordinary families picking up the tab for Fianna Fáil's destruction of our economy. In fact 75% of the Government's current savings in year one of their plan comes from increased taxation. Because of this reliance on taxes rather than spending controls a family with two children with an income of €60,000 will lose €4,600 in extra taxes as a result of this Budget. That represents an 8% cut in their family income.

"Wider than this raid on Irish families, with 520,000 people expected on the dole next year, the absence of a plan to get people back to work is an astonishing omission from today's presentation. The Taoiseach announced 'jobs jobs jobs' as his priority at the Dublin Chamber of Commerce earlier this year. This Budget shows no evidence that employment was a priority. There is no stimulus package, no pro-jobs tax measures and no real sense that the Government have any idea of how to get the country moving again.

"Finally, Fianna Fáil has taken a massive €90 billion gamble on behalf of the taxpayer in bailing out the very property speculators and banks that dragged our economy over a cliff in the last few years. Rather than adopt the Fine Gael policy on this issue which would see the banks being responsible for the bad debts they had racked up, it is now the taxpayer that is exposed. We have precious little by way of detail about this new bailout plan for the property speculators and banks and the real risk is that this bailout will leave the taxpayer fatally exposed to the bad debts of others.

"If ever there was proof that this Government was not capable of leading the country out of this recession, then today's Budget is final proof. No plan for jobs, the wrong balance on tax increases and spending cuts and a dangerous bailout plan for property speculators and banks confirms that this Government is hopelessly out of its depth in dealing with the economic crisis that they caused. I have said repeatedly that no economy can tax its way back to recovery - this Fianna Fáil Government had just decided to try it anyway. As usual, when Fianna Fáil get it wrong, ordinary families pay the price."

Budget pounds young families, middle income earners the hardest- Coveney

Parents in their 30's with young families pay the bill for disastrous FF mistakes

Young families and those on the modest and middle incomes will bear the brunt of the pain inflicted by the Government's Budget today (Tuesday), Fine Gael Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Spokesman, Simon Coveney has said.

"All the pre-Budget pretensions by the Government that this Budget would be fair have been proven to be totally false.

"Those on middle incomes will take the hardest hit. This is especially true of young families.

"Ordinary families will be hit for an average of €2,500 and those families just starting off will take a particularly hard hit. For example: Two parents in their 30's, one with an income of €56,000 and the other a stay at home parent, who purchased an apartment seven years ago and have one child will see:

- Their income levy doubled
- Their health levy doubled
- Their PRSI up 4%
- Their Mortgage Interest Relief abolished
- Their Child Benefit massively reduced next year
- Their Early Childcare Supplement abolished within the year

"The Budget is a targeted attack on our young generation. Those in their 20's and 30's on middle incomes who, if they are lucky enough to hold a job, are already struggling with mortgage repayments and the high cost of living."

Brian Lenihans Budget Speeech may be sourced here

NY - Third Presidential Debate-McCain goes on the attack (Obama Company Taxation plans will send millions of jobs to Europe and Asia)

This debate featured sharper exchanges than the previous two. McCain was the more forceful of the two candidates and delved forensically into policy matters. Obama attempted to parry McCain attacks. This is a calculated strategy to avoid a detailed analysis of Obama policies many of which do not stand up to scrutiny especially in the current financial crisis. His promises of a middle class tax cut are hot air-incapable of being implemented in the current financial circumstances, without a spending freeze-which Obama opposes.

The debate opened with a discussion on taxation. John McCain stressed the need to reduce taxes and the necessity not to increase taxes on the likes of Joe Plumber. McCain opposed Obamas plans to increase company taxation on the basis of a jobs outflow to lower taxation destinations in Europe and Asia. Obama spoke about middle class tax cuts. McCain emphasized the necessity to reduce taxes on business to increase employment opportunities.

The next topic was the deficit. Both candidates spoke about the necessity of reducing the deficit. McCain was far more specific. He emphasized a spending freeze and detailed methods for balancing the budget. Obama was particularly weak on this topic. Obama opposed a spending freeze. Hence his proposals for a middle income tax cut go up in smoke. McCain emphasized that Obama has proposals for 860 billion dollars in extra spending.

Obama attempted to tie McCain to President Bush. John McCain said:”I am not President Bush.” John McCain said that Barack Obama had voted for two budgets, which increased taxes on those earning over 42,000 dollars. Obama denied this –not too convincingly.

The third segment featured negative campaigning. Both candidates criticized each others campaign strategies. Obama criticized comments at Sarah Palins rallies. McCain strongly defended her. He outlined how he had condemned any unfair comments in contrast to Obama who had singularly failed to do so. McCain referred to disgraceful happenings at Democratic rallies, which had largely gone unreported. He referred to outrageous comments by Democrat Congressman John Lewis who attempted to tie him to George Wallace. William Ayres and Acorn figured strongly. This may have damaged Obama. Obama failed to convince here.


The next topic was advisors and running mates.McCain listed Palin’s achievements in Alaska on energy, rooting out of corruption and balancing the budget. Obama defended Joe Biden. John McCain referred to Biden’s vote against the First Gulf War and a proposal to divide Iraq in three segments-both serious blunders.

Energy was the next topic featured. McCain was stronger on energy hammering Obama on nuclear and off shore drilling. Obama is opposed to more nuclear and off shore drilling.

Trade featured next with sharp exchanges on free trade. McCain caught Obama on trade with Colombia. McCain warned that to restrict free trade and to raise taxes is to trigger a depression. He is correct. NAFTA also figured here.

Health Plans figured next. Both candidates rehearsed the same arguments as in the previous two debates. On this occasion McCain explained clearly that 95% of Americans would be better off under his plan. He had failed to explain this fully previously.

Roe V Wade came up for discussion. McCain damaged Obama on the issue of partial birth abortion. Obama waffled on this issue. Obama supports tax payer funded abortions.

Education featured sharp exchanges. Obama appears content to throw money at the problem. McCain was stronger on reform of the system.

Obama's approach is governed by a desire to Spend, Spend, Spend. Greater state involvement, greater state involvement. The corollary of this is higher taxation and stagnation. Obama's coolness and smooth talking is no substitute for substance. Obama's policy of higher taxation on businesses is a godsend to workers in Europe and Asia. More American plants will move to these destinations to avoid higher taxation. His company taxation policy is economic lunacy. American workers vote for Obama if you wish to send your jobs to Europe and Asia. No wonder most Europeans are rooting for Obama.

Obama's Spending Plans involve a smash and grab raid on American Taxpayers

Many voters are besotted with the rhetoric, oomph and personality of Barack Obama. All this comes with a price tag. Unfortunately most of his supporters have failed to delve into the specifics of his taxation policy.
Obama’s taxation policies are a mirror image of the failed taxation policies of the French and Swedish Socialist parties.

He has promised to raise the capital gains tax from the current 15% to 28%. This is a recipe for disaster. Lower rates of capital gains tax bring in higher revenue yields. Reganomics proved the veracity of this statement.
Obama’s capital gains tax increase will hit 100 million American tax payers. Investors are likely to move in advance of an Obama Presidency- to sell shares. This may trigger a stock market crash.

He is a strong believer in higher Government spending. His promises so far amount to $800 billion over four years.

He intends to allow the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts to expire in 2010. This will raise taxes on millions of Americans by many billions of dollars.

He intends to tamper with the $102,000 FICA payroll tax cap. A President Obama will ensure that anyone making over $102,000 will pay an additional 7% in taxes on earned income.
He also intends to target the loan dividend tax rate implemented by George Bush.

Obama’s rhetoric may hypnotise many voters but his taxation policies leave a sour taste. He is on the extreme left of the Democratic Party and is no more than a tax and spend liberal. He is the darling of the Democratic Socialists of America .This group was formed from an amalgamation of Trotskyites, Communists and extreme left elements.

RTE's This Week Programme -Should Children's Allowances be taxed?

This Week analysed the thorny issue of the possible taxation of childrens allowances. The contribution of Charlie McCreevy to the increase in childrens allowances was painted in glowing terms. Nothing wrong with this.

There were two references to the FG Party. Both were out of context.

1. One referred to the proposal of Garrett Fitzgerald that stay at home wives should be paid.
2. The second referred to John Bruton and the decision to tax children's shoes.

• The report could have mentioned Charlie McCreevy's Dirty Dozen social welfare cuts. But did not.
• It could have dealt with the massive rise in stealth taxes introduced by McCreevy after the 2002 General Election but did not.
• It could have referred the fact that the same Bruton budget included a plan to increase Social Welfare payments including children's allowances by 25%. But did not.
• The Fitzgerald proposal was not very controversial as it involved no net loss to a married couple unlike the proposal to tax childrens allowances.