Obama, Democrats abandon stimulus for austerity

[Karmadillo]

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/jun2010/aust-j10.shtml

Obama, Democrats abandon stimulus for austerity
By Barry Grey
10 June 2010

With long-term unemployment at its highest level since records began in the 1940s, the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders are abandoning even the wholly inadequate economic stimulus measures of last year and focusing instead on budget-cutting and austerity.

On Tuesday, President Obama hailed the announcement of his budget director, Peter Orszag, that the administration was ordering every federal government agency to cut its budget by 5 percent. This comes on top of a previously announced three-year freeze on all non-defense, non-security discretionary spending. Taken together, the measures are projected to cut $250 billion over 10 years—overwhelmingly from reductions in social spending.

These steps, however, are seen as mere down payments on far more massive cuts in basic social programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which are expected to be recommended by the president’s commission on debt reduction. The panel is slated to issue its report after this November’s congressional elections. The commission’s proposals for slashing basic entitlement programs will come on top of the $500 billion in Medicare spending cuts included in Obama’s health care “reform.”

<edit>

The House did retain $28.5 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for corporations (under the guise of a “jobs” bill). The Senate is now considering its version of the House bill, which includes the renewal of more than 70 tax breaks for business that expired December 31.

The White House and both parties rule out any serious government action to create jobs, such as public works programs and direct job-creation. All measures nominally aimed at creating jobs are entirely geared to generating profits for the “private sector.”

more...

[burnsei sensei]

1. You call this austerity?

Quote:
On Tuesday, President Obama hailed the announcement of his budget director, Peter Orszag, that the administration was ordering every federal government agency to cut its budget by 5 percent. This comes on top of a previously announced three-year freeze on all non-defense, non-security discretionary spending. Taken together, the measures are projected to cut $250 billion over 10 years—overwhelmingly from reductions in social spending.
end quote.

Tax Wall Street.
Tax big pharma and the members of AHIP.
Tax the people who have not been paying their fair share.
Do not balance the budget on the backs of those who can least afford to pay-- the middle & lower class.
Austerity usually means one thing-- punish the impoverished to keep the benefits of wealth intact.
I want the meaning of this word to change.

[Autumn]

2. The big banks and wall street seem to be doing well,

I guess we really can't ask for more than that. Or can we?

[dpbrown]

3. What about Defense???

There's no austerity when half the budget is going to the military.

[RKP5637]

5. Oh, MIC cuts are off the table, US has to have presence in 80 countries,

wage war in two and likely plan for more, you know, US national security, keeping them there. Meanwhile, we can let our country at home go to hell, but it's good MIC business. Also, keep wall street, banks and any well-monied propped up. Gotta keep all of them happy too. The hell with the peasants of the land...

[azul]

9. Pin the writing on the wal onto your rep's foreheads:

Physical and financial and moral ruin= peak oil wars.

Get out of oil and coal energy immediately.
Get out of the oil war business.

Take some of the budgeted money thus saved and invest in education, other energies and pay off some of the debt. That is, invest in a real sustainable future.

[boston bean]

4. Dear god if they fuck around with social security and medicare

I will never ever ever forgive the democratic party!

NEVER.

They will have really become republicans.

Only a democratic president could get away with this this.

And I am sure there will be some on this board who will be fine and dandy with it because Barack Obama is proposing it.

It will be a sad sad sad day.

[RKP5637]

8. Frankly, I'm starting to think they don't know what the F they are doing. Further,

how can anyone expect a gov. that basically runs on bribery via political contributions, corporations now considered citizens, endless lobbyists and revolving doors between gov. and corporations, and endless benefits to have interests for the majority of the citizens in mind. It's morphed into a system that works against most of the citizens.

[AllentownJake]

10. He is a constitutional lawyer

What makes anyone think he knows the first thing about basic economics.

Secondly the people he hired, Romer, Geithner, Bernake, Summers are all proven idiots.

Why is anyone acting surprised right now.

[RKP5637]

15. +1, n/t

[laughingliberal]

19. +1 nt

[dorkulon]

23. You're right that it's depressingly predictable, but enough pretending he doesn't get it.

He knows exactly what he's doing. He knows exactly who Summers and Geithner are and that's why he hired them.

[AllentownJake]

25. No he was told to hire them

by the same people who told Bill to hire Bob Rubin.

The President doesn't understand half the economic shit that is going on...nor should he be expected to.

Besides, Barack is marginally in charge of anything.

[dorkulon]

28. Whatever. He's the president, he makes the appointments.

If he's taking advice from others, it's still him that chooses. Nobody can force him to do shit.

[AllentownJake]

29. The last real President we had

Died in 1963.

Barack is our cool figurehead. They need a democrat right now to do all the shitty stuff a Republican could never get away with.

[RKP5637]

33. And I had once thought he would be some combination of FDR and JFK. n/t

[truebrit71]

36. Yup...

..and even he wasn't pure as the driven..

[AllentownJake]

37. None of them are pure

to expect such would be silly. I'm beginning to suspect the President has about as much power as the Queen of England.

[Joe Fields]

47. the last real one may have died in '63, but the last honest one was Carter.

BTW, I agree that they need a dem to do the unpalatable things that the repubs themselves need done.

[JVS]

40. Your expectations are improperly low.

Total lack of intellectual curiosity was expected under Bush, but Obama is an intelligent man who should be capable and interested in learning about economics, especially as he saw that the shit was hitting the fan during 2008 as he was running for president. 2 years later he could and should be a lot better informed.

[AllentownJake]

41. Bush isn't an idiot

Despite what our side might think. If anything I have to give props to Bush for the craven way he got whatever he wanted.

He started two wars, bankrupted the country, made all his friends richer and he's comfortably sitting at Texas bragging about it.

He's an evil son of a bitch, but dumb is not a quality I prescribe to him, often.

As for the current President, he spent his time reading Lincoln as preparation for office when he should have been reading FDR. Unless there is a civil war on the horizon I'm unaware of.

[RKP5637]

43. Bush knew how to talk to the idiot factor of this nation and worked that well. I agree,

Bush is not a stupid person, it was part of the act. I have to give props to Bush too for the craven way he got whatever he wanted, a top manipulator and con artist together with his cronies. And here we are now in this fine mess. My regret is he did not have to deal with a lot of the mess he created, too bad it all didn't fall in on him in his second term.

[AllentownJake]

44. Before running for President

He sounded somewhat articulate, and from CT.

[Laelth]

50. Hear, hear. Bush is evil, but not dumb. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[JVS]

53. That really doesn't answer the point. Even if Bush is smarter than he acted...

Obama is perfectly capable of informing himself of issues that are important. And there have been two years in which he should have realized that he needs to know how the economy functions.

[Individualist]

42. The buck stops where?

[AllentownJake]

45. Didn't say he wasn't a willing party

I kind of view him like Queen Elizabeth these days.

[truebrit71]

35. I am too...

...and to be honest I don't think there is a single simple solution to the problem..but changing course half-way through due to a mid-term election (and that is the real reason - let's face it) is just plain dumb..

He is well on his way to becoming a one-termer, and a pretty poor one at that..

(That's why I cringe when people say they want Mooselini to run in 2012...if this shit keeps up there's a real solid chance that crazy witch could win..)

[RKP5637]

38. Yep, never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter, the nation that

voted in Bush twice, and the SCOTUS that gave him the presidency. I don't think he's going to be well positioned for 2012, unless a lot changes by then, there is so much unrest in the country. Each day now I wonder WTF.

[enlightenment]

13. I'm wondering if the new UK leadership

has taken its cue from our leadership - or the other way around?

The new Con/Lib government there has just announced 'fundamental change' (i.e., destroy what's left of the economy) but are trying to suggest that they'll do it the 'right' way by forming a star chamber (their version of our deficit commission) to recommend what to cut.

At least Cameron can claim the conservative title. Not sure what has happened to the Democratic leadership . . .

Very sad.

[loudsue]

6. We spend TRILLIONS more on the military machine than we do on our people and keeping them

alive, fed, housed and healthy. Which part of the "pursuit of happiness" does any of this come under?

[avogadro]

11. Since when

did it become the responsibility of the federal government to keep us alive, feed us, house us, and keep us healthy? Jesus H. Christ!

[boston bean]

14. Will you make it past one post??? nt

[avogadro]

18. Yes....

here's #2. So there...

[boston bean]

20. Come on give it your best for #3. nt

[AllentownJake]

21. When they were responsible for getting them over there so they don't get us here nt.

[Autumn]

16. Since they use OUR tax dollars. They don't have

to "keep us alive, feed us, house us, and keep us healthy", but it's our money and better things should be done with it. Was it their responsibility to keep the big banks flush, alive and healthy? With our tax dollars?. I don't mind if they use our tax money to help people who need it, or to provide vital services.

[avogadro]

27. Now this is a good reply...

to my post. I don't mind if our tax dollars are used to help people who need it either. I only wish we could find more effecient ways to help those who are truly needy. I'm not surprised to see you are a HRC supporter....so am I BTW.

[loudsue]

17. Since when did it become the responsibility of the taxpayers to

spend all of our hard earned money, that COULD KEEP US ALIVE, FED, HOUSED AND HEALTHY, instead on taxes that keep the wealthy military industrial complex rolling in so much of OUR money that they will NEVER have to worry about being fed, housed and healthy.

That's when.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RKP5637]

26. +1, n/t

[Starry Messenger]

30. The old boy really had staying power.

[Ezlivin]

39. They do it for every single soldier

And our Congress critters seem to do pretty damned good.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raineyb]

51. ...

[NoNothing]

32. What do you mean by that

Social spending exceeds defense spending by a considerable amount. Granted defense spending is still way too high, higher than it needs to be by probably half, but as I've said before we can't gain any credibility in the solutions department if we fail to acknowledge reality.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ananda]

12. OK. Where are the cuts to war spending?

nt

[AllentownJake]

31. Same place as the cuts to corporate subsidies nt.

[joeybee12]

22. Idiots...n/t

[lonestarnot]

34. More austerity for the already poor. They got theirs already.

[krispos42]

48. Raise taxes on the richest 100k or fuck 30 million people?

Gee, that's a tough choice, isn't it?

[Laelth]

49. This can't be right. If so, it is insane. n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Duer 157099]

52. Motherfucking motherfuckers can't seem to stop spending for MILITARY bullshit!

Jesus H. Christ will it never end?