Republican Doom & Gloom predictions about Obama Economy Wrong. Now in Charge with all new predictions, will they succeed!!?

On the major issues facing our country, Republicans were flat out wrong in their now wacky predictions of doom and gloom. But those predictions did sour the public on Obama and the progress he made restoring the economy. It also got Trump elected.

Now these same geniuses are in charge, again predicting a Republican utopia of plentiful jobs, energy, cheaper and better health care, and world wide peace through brother Russia.

Suckers. Think Progress made a list of what now read like Onion stories:

1. Gas was supposed to cost $6.60 per gallon.In March 2012, on the floor of the United States Senate, Mike Lee (R-UT) predicted that if Obama was reelected gas would cost $6.60 per by the end of Obama’s second term. Newt Gingrich, running for the GOP nomination, predicted that if Obama was reelected he would push gas to “$10 a gallon.” Gingrich said he would reduce gas prices dramatically by reversing Obama’s energy policies. Lee, Gingrich and others criticized — the rejection of Keystone XL pipeline, more EPA regulation and limiting drilling on public land — have not gotten in the way of historically low prices. 

2. Unemployment was supposed to be stuck at over 8%: In September 2012, Mitt Romney predicted that if Obama is reelected “you’re going to see chronic high unemployment continue four years or longer.” Romney pledged that, if elected, he could bring the unemployment rate down to 6% by January 2017. The unemployment rate currently stands at 4.6% and has been under 6% since September 2014.

3. The stock market was supposed to crash: Immediately after Obama won reelection in November 2012, many commenters, including Donald Trump, predicted that the stock market was toast. The Dow Jones Industrial Average currently stands at 19,762.60 and is up over 46% since Obama was reelected. 

4. The entire U.S. economy was supposed to collapse: Rush Limbaugh predicted that

“the country’s economy is going to collapse if Obama is re-elected.” Limbaugh was confident in his prediction: “There’s no if about this. And it’s gonna be ugly. It’s gonna be gut wrenching, but it will happen.” The economic free-fall would begin, according to Limbaugh, because “California is going to declare bankruptcy” and Obama would force states like Texas to “bail them out.” California currently has a $2.8 billion budget surplus. Limbaugh added, “I know mathematics, and I know economics. I know history. I know socialism, statism, Marxism, I know where it goes. I know what happens at the end of it.” Limbaugh said the economic apocalypse could take “a year and a half, two years, three years.” It’s been four years and two months since Limbaugh’s prediction. The U.S. economy grew at a robust 3.5% in the 3rd quarter of 2016.

Republican Presidential Candidates Promise to cut Taxes between $7 trillion to $10 trillion, while also Balancing the Budget by Paying Off Debt...with what?

In anticipation of the Republican attack on Bernie Sanders supposed budget busting plan to offer free health care and college education, let’s take a look at what they’re offering. Voxdotcom's headline nails it:

"We've lost sight of how wildly irresponsible the Republican tax plans are"

Here's a brief look:

Marco Rubio has promised tax cuts amounting to $6.8 trillion, Cruz $8.6 trillion, and Trump a whopping $9.5 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center (and that's not including interest on the debt they would rack up!).

By comparison, the budget disaster we saw coming a mile away with the Bush tax cuts...

The tax cuts George W. Bush proposed during the 2000 campaign were $1.32 trillion — which would be $1.82 trillion in today's dollars. And taxes were higher in 2000 than they are today, and the country was running surpluses rather than deficits.

The misleading dopiness of a Balanced Budget Amendment: What should be a no brainer for even the most conservative tightwad, is anything but, because it sounds good:

It gets worse. Rubio and Cruz both support a Balanced Budget Amendment, so they can't just add their tax cuts to the national debt. They also support spending more on the military — up to $1 trillion for Rubio, about $2.4 trillion for Cruz. 

For example; even though Rubio's chances are slim, he's still in the race and has the backing of Scott Walker. Here's his exciting simple plan:

Marco Rubio announced that he'll pay for his tax cuts by doing something truly big: ending funding for Medicaid and for the Children’s Health Insurance Program — which 71 million Americans, or 22 percent of the country, rely on for health care. Impressive, right? The problem is that only gets Rubio about $4.7 trillion.

Rubio could find another trillion dollars by eliminating all education spending — Pell grants, the Department of Education, K-12 funds, school nutrition programs, Head Start, all of it. That gets him to roughly $5.7 trillion. Knocking out all justice spending could net another $561 billion. But there might be some political resistance to wiping out the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, much of the Department of Justice, all United States attorneys, the entire federal judiciary, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

 And then to fulfill his balanced budget promise, he's got to get rid of the deficits that already exist and are projected to grow in the coming years.

Impossible? Yea. Cruz's out does Rubio's:

Cruz is proposing a full $8.6 trillion in tax cuts. To get there, he could start with everything on Rubio's list and then end all federal transportation funding. Goodbye, Coast Guard, Transportation Security Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal Highway Administration! And sorry, all you states relying on federal funds to build or rebuild your highways and ports! The problem is all that money only amounts to $935 billion. That gets Cruz to a cool $7.8 trillion, but his job isn't done yet.

The good news is that the $715 billion he could get from eliminating spending on veterans would pretty much close the gap. And who'll miss the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Veteran Benefits Administration, the Veterans Health Administration, or the National Cemetery Administration? Of course, there is one small problem Cruz has also promised to increase military spending by $2.4 trillion. And he's also got Rubio's balanced-budget problem.

Remember, they're doing this so Republicans won't have to raise taxes on the wealthy. And Trump's sketchy idea?

The projected US deficit for the next 10 years is $9.4 trillion. Passing Donald Trump’s $9.5 trillion tax cuts would more than double that total.

The federal government is expected to bring in about $21 trillion in individual income taxes over the next 10 years. Trump’s cuts amount to a 45 percent reduction from that projection … he's also promised to maintain funding for entitlements while increasing spending on the military. There's just no way to reconcile all that. Taken together, even the most sympathetic reading of Trump's plan dissolves into incoherence.

None of this even take into consideration spending on natural disasters that Republicans insist must be made up with cuts elsewhere.

Now that Republicans are in control: Budget Deficit Increases after 6 years of Decline.....

I think this says it all about our big talking supply-siders...an actual paragraph from the CBO report:

Huffington Post: "The government will spend $544 billion more than it takes in this year -- a $105 billion increase in the deficit from 2015, according to the CBO. At the same time, federal spending will increase by more than 20 percent … the result of a 7 percent increase in mandatory spending, a 3 percent increase in discretionary dollars, and a 14 percent jump in interest payments on debt … including a tax extenders package attached to the omnibus appropriations bill." 

Hate America Crowd of GOP candidates say it’s “beaten,” in “economic downturn,” “entrepreneurship is crushed,” “nothing that we do now to win,” “wages are too high.”

Republicans have always accused liberals of not liking America; whining about it and always trying to change it. But as you can see by the title, it's really a bad case of Republican projection.

Voxdotcom compared the GOP presidential candidates view of America with reality, and it’s not even close:

Anyone watching the fourth Republican debate we would be excused for thinking America is mired in a deep recession — that the economy is shrinking, foreign competitors are outpacing us, more Americans are uninsured, and innovators can't bring their ideas to market.

"We are a country that is being beaten on every front economically, militarily," sighed Donald Trump. "There is nothing that we do now to win." Ted Cruz said. "How do we bring back economic growth?" "We have to take our government back," said Carly Fiorina, "because innovation and entrepreneurship is crushed by the crushing load of a 73,000 page tax code" and "Obamacare isn’t helping anyone." "What we are going through in this country is not simply an economic downturn," said Marco Rubio. "We are living through a massive economic transformation." Ben Carson said, "Only 19.8 percent of black teenagers have a job who are looking for one," he said, "and that’s because of those high wages."

They would be surprised to find that unemployment is at 5 percent, America's recovery from the financial crisis has outpaced that of other developed nations, the percentage of uninsured Americans has been plummeting even as Obamacare has cost less than expected, and there's so much money flowing into new ideas and firms in the tech industry that observers are worried about a second tech bubble.  

Republicans still can’t offer a definitive plan that would make the numbers work. If anything (see the graph) they're promising to make things a whole lot worse. But that's probably just another way to justify even bigger cuts:

Republicans are increasingly focused on economic problems they don't really know how to solve, and don't have much credibility to say they will solve.

Republicans have entered into a disastrous arms race of ever more expensive tax plans that they have no way to pay for. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget released this graphic, which is based on the often optimistic estimates of the conservative Tax Foundation but still gives you a sense of how much these plans might cost:

The Republicans offer up alarming Dystopian vision of the "American Dream!"

I don't know why I was stunned by the dystopian-like agenda pursued by House Republicans, led by Paul Ryan. Just search this blog with the term "role call," or the name "ryan" and "ribble," you'll see breathe taking bills Republicans have been passing for years.

We're now "the land opportunism." Mad Max, Hunger Games and Fountainhead were works of fiction, not an actual blueprint for government policy.

If I use my conservative friend in Milwaukee's absolute hatred of government as a template, assuming he's your typical Republican voter, then it's clear nothing else matters; not laws; not human safety; not education; not health care; not internet freedom; not clean water; not pollution; not job training; not Pell grants; not saving billions on health care; not protecting retirement savings...etc.

House Republicans are trying to unravel two centuries worth of progress, the stuff that built the American dream.

It would be easier to call this a political suicide note, but oddly it isn't. In the name of small government, Republicans want to...

1. Prohibit any federal money from being spent on the Affordable Care Act.

2. Drastically reduce funds for the enforcement of new labor rules.
3. Reverse efforts to impose strict rules on for-profit universities .

4. Reverse new rules requiring retirement investment advisers to prove they have no financial conflicts of interest.

5. Another bill would stop regulation of hydraulic fracturing; prohibit implementation of carbon emission standards for electric power plants; block new clean-water rules; and stop the government’s marine and coastal planning efforts to respond to climate change.

6. A bill would block the Food and Drug Administration from reviewing e-cigarette marketing.

7. Keep the FCC from carrying out “net neutrality” regulation of the Internet.

8. Push a “conscience” rider that would let employers in the District of Columbia refuse health insurance coverage for any service on moral grounds, and hire and fire based on women’s use of health services.

9. Either reduce full-day, full-year service for 570,000 young children in Head Start or cut 140,000 children from the program altogether.

10. Funding for job training would be almost $500 million less than the White House requested.

11. Cuts to the National Park Service would delay about 70 percent of its construction projects and more than a third of its repair and rehabilitation efforts

12. A bill would also cut $370 million from the Pell Grant higher education program.

13. The main federal family planning program, Title X, would be eliminated … a major strike against women’s health care Title X, the only federal grant program dedicated solely to providing individuals with comprehensive family planning and related reproductive health services, including contraception. 90% of the people Title X serves have incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, and 63 percent are uninsured. 6 in 10 women who access health care services from a Title X-funded health center consider this their main source of health care … saves taxpayers money: For every public dollar invested in family planning, the American taxpayer saves approximately $7 in Medicaid-related costs. Nearly half of all births in the U.S. are paid for by Medicaid; the average national cost for one Medicaid-covered birth is $12,770. This is a stark contrast to the $239 per-client cost of publicly funded contraceptive care through Title X family planning. It is estimated that Title X saves taxpayers nearly $7 billion a year.

"Worried " Walker puts positive spin on Doom & Gloom.

Scott Walker is a strict ideologue. Ideologues replace problems with theories they strongly believe in. That's why they don't have to solve problems, as is evidenced by the comments made by the current crop of candidates for president, especially Walker.            

In a recent WTMJ Radio interview, he said some really stupid things that the media in Wisconsin refuses to address.

Like when Walker’s “realist” doom and gloom view of America included the word “worried” 12

times in just 15 minutes. The national media picked up on it, but not the local conservative radio host, who thought nothing of Walker’s whiny dislike of our current way of life. Yes, conservatives hate the country so much they want to “turn America around,” and turn it into a free market dystopian fascist hellhole under the Orwellian banner of “freedom and liberty.”

Leadership: When asked if he's a gloomy guy, a reference to a recent Yahoo News article critiquing a recent speech in which he said "worried" 12 times in 15 minutes: "No, I’m a realist. As worried as I am about our country, I know with the right leadership in Washington, there’s no doubt we can turn America around and make America great again just like we did in Wisconsin."

Because American isn't great? Oh boy, the simpleton tea party voters won't like that.

What's this “Just like we did in Wisconsin?” What a great model; Wisconsinites are bitter enemies with their neighbors and no longer share the cost of public parks and education,....that takes the "us" out of U.S..

National debt: How to address the national debt, which he identified as the country's greatest domestic threat: "I believe it takes the kind of reform we put in place four years ago both in growth and reform. That means lowering the marginal tax rates, putting in place a competitive corporate tax rate so that we can bring jobs back from overseas so our fellow Americans can get back to work.

My god, Walker’s cluelessness about “ObamaCare” is still one of the great uncovered stories. Despite patients already making choices in the Healthcare.gov marketplace and choosing a doctor, Walker promises to give us...choices, except without the marketplace and tax credits. Welcome to the old insurance controlled system of exceptions, dropped policies, taxpayer supported high risk pools and the deaths of 50,000 people a year that could have been prevented…yup, "freedom and liberty:” 

We need to repeal Obamacare and allow patients to make those decisions..."

Regulatory overreach killing Businesses? Sure, why not says new Republican Majority.

Consumer confidence is up and the economy is doing well. So how do you spin that if you're the new Republican majority? Like before, they are creatng their own, more downbeat pessimistic reality right before our eyes.

Politico: In their view, Obama is indifferent to the economic impact of all of his regulations. “The president doesn’t seem to care about the impact of these regulations on families,” said John Barrasso of Wyoming, the chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, adding that the administration is showing “a complete neglect of the economic impact” of the load of new rules.

Did you notice the more personalized, supposed man on the street reference to the impact regulations have on..."families." What does that mean? I guess low wages are due to highly profitable businesses being regulated. Without Obama regulations, corporations would be free to cut profits and hand out big fat raises to Joe shmo employees, right? And there is a Santa Claus too.

Well, let's see how bad things are, under the oppressive regulatory thumb of the Obama administrations socialist agenda. Thankfully, we've put the Republicans in charge of the economy now:

GOP Predictions as Wrong as their Trickle Down Economic plan.

Think Progress reminded all of us how wrong Republicans were about the economy and just about everything else. And we're supposed to trust them with the economy now?

4 Things That Were Supposed To Happen By 2015 Because Obama Was Reelected

1. Gas was supposed to cost $5.45 per gallon. Gingrich said he would reduce gas prices dramatically by reversing Obama’s energy policies. Gingrich flanked himself with campaign signs promising $2.50 gas if he was elected. Today, the nationwide average for a gallon of gas is $2.24.

2. Unemployment was supposed to be stuck at over 8%

3. The stock market was supposed to crash: Donald J. Trump tweeted: "The stock market and US dollar are both plunging today. Welcome to @BarackObama’s second term."

4. The entire U.S. economy was supposed to collapse: Rush Limbaugh predicted that “the country’s economy is going to collapse if Obama is re-elected.” Limbaugh was confident in his prediction: “There’s no if about this. And it’s gonna be ugly. It’s gonna be gut wrenching, but it will happen.”

Stop placating the Angry, Incoherent Far Right!!!

It’s time we stop acting like a bunch of complete dupes. Are we really so dumb that we think Republicans won’t pass right-to-work, disband the GAB, expand vouchers, give Wisconsin up to mining, regulate and complicate voting, pretend Walker isn't running for president, won't dump women’s health care, reject the casino, and bounce the Supreme Court’s chief justice out the door? Seriously?

“Boots and Sabers” blogger Owen Robinson is another conservative space cadet the media swoons over, like the mind numbing recycled nonsense from Christian Schneider. Robinson put it all out there yesterday, proving to everyone these people are bat crazy and should not be sitting across the table from educated professionals.

Name calling? Well, have you seen Robinson’s list of “solutions?”

Any intelligent adult who knows anything about life, and governments roll managing the state, taxes and services, will be appalled at the following deconstruction of our state. It appears freeloading and handing the bill to our kids is the party platform now.

Lifted from a 70's bumper sticker reading “We live in a state that taxes, regulates and spends too much,” Robinson goes for the throat of everything that’s left to slash, leaving behind a wasteland of dangerous products and services in communities that don’t have safe drinking water, paved roads to drive on, fewer schools to teach, and more ozone to breath. Oh, and lets defund the UW:

But if the Republicans really want to move the needle … they need to advance some fundamental and seismic reforms. The state should:

■ freeze property taxes and take a chainsaw to the regulatory structure that shackles Wisconsinites;■ match massive tax cuts with massive spending cuts;■ abolish shared revenue as Gov. Scott McCallum wisely advocated years ago;■ cut funding for transportation;■ reform the criminal code and cut prison funding;■ cut the lavish funding for the University of Wisconsin;■ and continue to reform and cut spending on K-12 education.

"Lavish funding," for the UW? If you say so Owen...

According to the Postsecondary Education Opportunity report, Wisconsin’s investment efforts since 1980 have fallen by 54.3 percent, putting it in the top 10 worst in the country. Significant hikes in tuition have been a natural response at schools around the country.

 Sorry, now I'm debating this mindless time wasting lunacy.

Fact # 1: Democrats make things better, Republicans don't.

Republicans will continue to win elections by souring Americans on the economy; lower wages foster resentment and keep people from sharing in the recovery.

So despite a rather brisk economic recovery, the public overwhelmingly disagrees with the way Obama has managed it. You can thank the fabricated and constant GOP attacks. And yet, the following figures overwhelmingly show Obama killing Bush's supply side recovery. The facts don't lie, but Republicans do:

I have to laugh though, because even these figures will spur on an avalanche of tweets asking me to "prove" my point with facts. Kinda makes you wonder what the right considers a "fact," not that anyone should spend much time trying to burst their bubble. It ain't gonna happen.

But reality seekers rejoice, here are some of the details. This is just a FYI, and something to pack away until Democrats are called on to save the economy again. Mother Jones:

The Obama recovery isn't just a little bit better than the Bush recovery. It's miles better. But here's the interesting thing. This chart looks only at private sector employment. If you want to make Bush look better, you can look at total employment instead. It's still not a great picture: Bush got a nice tailwind from increased hiring at the state and federal level. Obama, conversely, was sailing into heavy headwinds because he inherited a worse recession. States cut employment sharply—partly because they had to and partly because Republican governors saw the recession as an opportunity to slash the size of government—and Congress was unwilling to help them out in any kind of serious way. If you want to credit Bush for his tax cuts and malign Obama for his stimulus program and his regulatory posture, then you have to accept the results as well. And by virtually any measure, including the fact that the current recovery hasn't ended in an epic global crash, Obama has done considerably better than Bush. 

Governors Perry and Jindal warn Americans: "If you just give us one more opportunity...we won't fritter it away."

A very nice reminder...a little late though:

Politico: Texas Gov. Rick Perry said the message Republicans should take away from the election was: “Lord, if you’ll just give us one more opportunity to govern, we won’t fritter it away this time.” 

And Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal warned the day after the election: “The American people have given us an opportunity. We have squandered the opportunity before when we’ve been in power.”

Wow! Republican State Sen. Scott Fitzgerald brags "Any shortfall created by a tax cut is fine."

Facing a possible $4 billion deficit, using the same kind of math Scott Walker has is using to bash former Gov. Jim Doyle and Mary Burke, Republicans are now starting to work into their rhetoric the benefits of deficits. Believe it or not.

The Mic 92.1's Devil's Advocates show got this "Dick Cheney" like response about deficits from Sen. Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, and how they don't really matter much. Even worse, he was speaking for Scott Walker, who would say deficits caused by tax cuts are better than your everyday kind of deficits...basically.

Fitzgerald: "He's gonna say it's a deficit created by tax cuts, that's a much different situation than what we had...Any shortfall created by a tax cut is fine."

Bush and Cheney pushed this same supply side accounting logic, and how did that turn out? $7 trillion in additional debt and counting (war/veterans costs continue).



Fitzgerald's comment is at about the 30 minute mark at the Devil's Advocates podcast site.

Walker's new ad a Gold Mine for Bloggers...

Did he really NOT know his recent ad was bad idea?

Seriously, it didn't take long for me to throw this honest depiction of Walker economics together with a simple screen capture:

Why is this man smiling?

Heck, here's a few images...get creative:

Come on down...?

Walker's Problem: Deficit is Growing while the economy is growing!!!

WPR reporter Shawn Johnson should be thanked for doing what others in the media have decided to glance over, and that is to put the disastrous new projected structural deficit in historical perspective:

“The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau calculates the state's structural deficit has grown to nearly $1.8 billion, the third-largest gap reported by the state in the past two decades. The structural deficit was larger when Walker took office and larger yet in 2003. Those shortfalls were driven by recessions, however, whereas this deficit has taken shape at a time when the economy was growing.”

I've also written how Republicans have an immense problem with something called defensive “projection;” it’s where people "defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by either denying (or knowing of) their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others."

Yes, I have a Scott Walker example of projection (audio below):

“These are the people that gave us a $3.6 billion budget deficit, I mean, this is selective amnesia on their part. The bottom line is we inherited something much, much greater than what we're talking about now.”

And as Shawn Johnson reported: 

“The structural deficit was larger when Walker took office and larger yet in 2003. Those shortfalls were driven by recessions, however, whereas this deficit has taken shape at a time when the economy was growing.”

Walker game plan for a possible Deficit? Walker is already running from a solution, and instead wants to hold onto those irresponsible tax cuts for dear life. It beats working:

Walker said he expected those revenues would pick up and brushed off criticism.

State Sen. Jennifer Shilling is asking Walker to show us some leadership:

"I think the governor should be truthful and forthcoming about how his administration would tackle these numbers..." 

Wisconsin Revenues Ratchet Downward...Forever? Republicans can actually benefit from their mistake, as usual, by challenging the possible incoming Democratic governor to “raise taxes” via the repeal of a few damaging corporate giveaways.

Another words, once taxes are cut, it would be political poison to repeal them. Checkmate. 

$1.8 billion structural deficit? Republicans excuses abound....

You would have thought the sky was falling the way Republicans have been complaining about the slow jobs and business recovery under the Obama administration. Add to that the non-participatory unemployed and you've got what Republicans call a failed policy.

But now that we have slower jobs and business growth in Wisconsin under Republican Scott Walker, including a growing deficit (unlike the declining U.S. deficit under Obama), we’re being told by the GOP that we’re moving forward and Democrats are whiners.

Here’s the reaction by Republicans over the news of a possible $1.8 billion structural deficit due to Scott Walker's election year tax cuts:

Senator Paul Farrow: “Contrary to what we will hear from Legislative Democrats, the sky is not falling. These projections by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau are not perfect calculations and should be treated as a learning opportunity."

Deficits are learning opportunities? Projections aren't perfect? Please. Republicans like Farrow continue to downplay their party’s Great Recession and the impact it had on state economy. Even worse, Farrow is wondering why the Democrats don’t help solve the state’s problems, even though they've been shut out of the process by our authoritarian winner-take-all Republican government:

“I find it disingenuous for the same Democrats who drove our state into a truly staggering $3.6 billion deficit … We are a long way from experiencing a full economic recovery; it would be nice to get some help from the other side instead of having them work against Wisconsin’s successes. I will continue to work with Governor Walker to pursue a balanced budget and will always stand-up for Wisconsin’s taxpayers while rooting for a Wisconsin recovery, never against one.”

See that, pointing out the problem is “rooting” against our state’s economy, a talking point you'll hear a lot of as the bad news trickles out. How many decades did we hear Republicans telling us how bad Wisconsin was for business? Guess that was a self fulfilling prophesy. Resistance is futile folks. There's more:

Senator Alberta Darling and Representative John Nygren: "Wisconsin does not have a deficit. Once again, Democrats continue to root against Wisconsin's success story. Democrats are using political math to deflect from the poor budgeting decisions they made in the past. Under Democratic leadership Wisconsin had a $3.6 billion deficit, 9.2% unemployment, while more than 133,000 jobs and 27,000 businesses left the state.”

Again, Republicans continue to blame the Great Recession on Democrats, especially Gov. Doyle and Mary Burke, without paying the political consequences for such an outrageous fiction.

One-third of Country on Government Assistance: Stagnant declining paychecks in new low wage service economy at fault? No-Brainer Stumps GOP.

Government assistance! Fox News does a wonderful job of acting like they just don't get it. And if it's not act, then why the hell are they still allowed to be on the air?

The video report below even mentions raising the minimum wage as a way of solving the nations increased dependence on government assistance, and still Fox News doesn't make the connection.

It's the GOP's "blame Americans first" policy, devoid of any real solutions, except perhaps making people do some kind of work, or kicking them off the programs. There's one problem though, most people getting assistance already work; are children; are vets and seniors (the unexpected Baby Boomers bubble).

I also blame Democrats for not drawing a line connecting wages to government assistance. How hard can it be for gods sake.

Over and over again, the Fox News reporter falsely claims we need to put more people to work when the real problem is low service industry wages. This false "pity the wealth producers" spin is driving me crazy:



Here's the story containing a solution to the problem Fox News refuses to acknowledge. You'll notice the power of suggestion focuses mostly on lazy people who don't work and the wealthy who are burdened by all that dead weight:

Newly released Census data reveals nearly 110 million Americans – more than one-third of the country – are receiving government assistance of some kind. At the end of 2012, according to the stats, 51.5 million were on food stamps, while 83 million were collecting Medicaid – with some benefitting from multiple programs. 

Though the programs were created to help those in need, some analysts worry that the way they’re designed is, increasingly, incentivizing people not to work. They note that when recipients combine several government assistance programs, in many cases they pay better than going to work.  

As for concerns that these benefits pay better than working, they argue the solution is to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour. "I think a lot of people would do the jobs when they pay a living wage,” said Melissa Boteach, from the Center for American Progress.

The challenge for policymakers is helping the economy adjust. "We have to figure out a way around this. Put innovation in play and really figure out how we're going to create a new economy where we can both raise wages and create more jobs for people," Boteach said.

Leave it to the Cato Institute to sympathize with the comical term "wealth producers:"

The Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner said "You can't in the long run have a society in which you have to rely on a smaller and smaller group of wealth producers who have to support more and more people who are not contributing to that wealth."

Let's Increase Deficits, say Wisconsin Republican Congressmen; More Unpaid for Corporate Tax Cuts.

Remember, increasing the deficit is actually good if corporations can keep more of their money. And because money is speech, corporate freedom is bigger and better than ever.

Voters should be happy business is so actively trying to help Americans understand the issues that affect corporate profits and business liberty to fund campaigns. 

It's true Republicans are screaming bloody murder over the nations problem with deficits, but that has more to do with giving money away to lazy freeloaders than dumping more cash into the pockets of big business. 

Unpaid for Tax Cuts, Again: Still in drunken sailor mode, Republicans are still cutting taxes for businesses without offsetting increases somewhere else, while Democrats push for fiscal sanity. Roll Call: 

CORPORATE TAX BREAKS, LARGER DEFICITS: The House passed a Republican-drafted bill (HR 4453) that would lower tax liabilities in certain instances when companies convert from “C corporation” to “S corporation” status. Because the bill is not paid for, it would add $1.5 billion to federal deficits between fiscal 2014-2024, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.  A yes vote was to pass a bill providing corporate tax relief while raising annual deficits.

Oh, look, deficit slashing Paul Ryan, Jim Sensenbrenner, Tom Petri, and Reid Ribble voted to increase deficits. That's not what they're saying at public listening sessions.

Supposed "tax and spend Democrats" like Mark Pocan, Ron Kind, and Gwen Moore voted to cut the deficit.

Even Bigger Deficits: Big business is apparently struggling right now, and needs this budget buster:

DEPRECIATION TAX BREAKS, LARGER DEFICITS: The House passed a Republican-drafted bill (HR 4457) that would permanently grant depreciation tax breaks to medium-size and small businesses. Such breaks now are temporary but are routinely renewed on an annual basis. Because the bill is not paid for, it would add $73 billion to federal deficits between fiscal 2014-2024, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation. In part, the bill would permanently raise to $500,000 the annual cost of qualified property that businesses can deduct from taxable income immediately rather than over many years.

A yes vote to depreciation tax breaks while raising annual deficits: Ryan, Sensenbrenner, Petri, Duffy, Ribble

Voting to reduce the deficit, Pocan, Kind, Moore.

A look back: Bush economic policies that got us here. Republicans are promising to bring it all back too...

Rummaging through past blog posts, I found this potpourri of stories dissecting the Bush economic disaster that got us to this point. It's laced with warnings and bullheaded Republican economic theories that in retrospect should have been stopped in its tracks.

We were warned at the time. And despite the administrations support for off shoring (yes, they knew it would cost jobs), anyone with a half a brain knew that wasn't going to work well. But Bush and the Republicans said the pain would be short lived. Guess not.

Sadly, at the time, I didn't save the links to these stories (links that would probably be dead today anyway). I think you'll be amazed at all the information Americans ignored:
___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Aug. 2003: What caused a projected surplus of $5.6 trillion to become a projected deficit of $4.4 trillion? Of this extraordinary $10 trillion deterioration, approximately 36 percent comes from enacted or expected tax cuts, 31 percent from budget increases, especially for defense and homeland security … President Bush's tax cuts since 2001 have shifted more of the tax burden from the nation's rich to middle-class families, according to the Congressional Budget Office

Feb 2004: According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, the single biggest cause of the deficit is the president's massive tax cuts for the wealthy -- which he conveniently did not mention. Specifically, 36% of the deficit comes from the tax cuts, while only 31% comes from defense/war related spending increases, And as the president starves veterans health care, low-income housing, and health care programs of funding, he is pushing more than $1 trillion in new tax cuts, primarily for the wealthy. 

2004: What we have here is a form of looting." So says George Akerlof, a Nobel laureate in economics of the Bush administration's budget policies. The government is simply borrowing to make up for the loss of revenue. In 2004, the typical family will pay about $700 less in taxes than it would have --- but meanwhile, the government will run up about $1500 in debt on that family's behalf. 

February 10, 2004 NY Times: The movement of American factory jobs and white-collar work to other countries is part of a positive transformation that will enrich the U.S. economy over time, even if it causes short-term pain and dislocation, the Bush administration said … in the president's annual report to Congress on the health of the economy. "Outsourcing is just a new way of doing international trade," said N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisors. "More things are tradable than were tradable in the past. And that's a good thing." His advisors acknowledge that international trade and foreign outsourcing have contributed to the job slump. Although trade expansion inevitably hurts some domestic workers, the benefits eventually will outweigh the costs as Americans are able to buy cheaper goods and services and as new jobs are created in growing sectors of the economy, the report said. "Maybe we will outsource a few radiologists," Mankiw told reporters. "What does that mean? Well, maybe the next generation of doctors will train fewer radiologists and will train more general practitioners or surgeons…. Maybe we've learned that we don't have a comparative advantage in radiologists. Mankiw said, "The market is the best determinant of where the jobs should be," he said. 

September 24, 2004: Responding to an election­ season request by Demo­crats, the Congressional Bud­get Office estimated that some of Presi­dent Bush's budget policies, plus other costs would add $1.3 trillion to federal deficits over the next decade.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

And finally, this amazingly futuristic and optimistic Salvador Dali plan for Social Security that will stun the senses:

Social Security also must be restructured to let workers put part of their retirement funds in private accounts, the report argues. Doing so could add nearly $5 trillion to the national debt by 2036, the president's advisors note, but the additional borrowing would be repaid 20 years later and the program's long-term health would be more secure. 

Conservative Extremists Criticize Democratic Platform that serves the People.

Who ever heard of the Wisconsin Daily Independent? Yea, another nonsensical right wing “news” site.

After paging through the Democratic Party Platform at the convention, I thought, how could anyone be against lower college debt, a living wage, a transition from depending on military spending, promote alternative energy etc.

WDI is not only against jobs and a better Wisconsin economy, they supplied the most moronic answers supporting their upside down thinking. Like their mind bending solution to student debt that makes an obscure reference to “stopping skyrocketing tuition,” ...which is a direct result of GOP funding cuts to public colleges:

Reducing student debt: Instead of finding a way from stopping the skyrocketing tuition over the years, instead of proposing a freeze like Governor Walker did, they just want to give better interest rates. Student debt going up is ok, as long as it’s at a good interest rate.

Yes, that lowers the eventual total cost of a student’s debt. Did I miss something?

Or the following amazing argument against accountable standards, teacher licensing and trying to stop fraud and exploitation for profit. Wow, that's a bad idea?

They want to cut off vouchers because “voucher schools are not held to the same standards, or teacher licensing, creating deregulated, unsupervised, and unaccountable schools with profiteers drawing from public coffers, committing fraud and exploitation,”. What they’re saying here is if you don’t like public schools and you’re poor, too bad. You’ll take the one size fits all education and like it.

And the frack sand mining boon that spread around this state without the thought of regulation or insuring the safety of those who live near mining operations, including schools and neighborhoods that are getting blanketed with silica dust:

They want to literally kill 100′s of jobs by “a temporary moratorium on further permitting of silica sand mines or handling facilities while a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS)”. This has been a boom for parts of Wisconsin and is has very little environmental impact if any.

Killing people though...not so bad. Save the jobs. Bragging that it’s a “boon” supposedly makes it safer?

My favorite is this little bit of word play, intentional or not:

Single payer healthcare. Need more be said about this one? In every industry that is government only run the quality goes down as the price goes up historically.

Get that? “In every industry"…instead of “in every country” where the quality is as good or better than in the U.S., and at half the price. Technically, the cost of care is a worldwide problem regardless of the system of insurance. 

Republicans Shifting Future Infrastructure Upgrades and much Higher Taxes onto our Kids so they can Freeload Now.

Our penny pinching conservatives are really just freeloaders, living off the work of past generations.

Below is a tweet on a topic I haven't found the right story to highlight yet with an entire post. But it is one of the most ignored and important consequences of GOP obstructionism in congress and in our state legislatures. Republicans will deny it, but they have done everything they can to prevent upgrading our near century old infrastructure.

Before any infrastructure projects are okay'ed, the Republicans are demanding looser environmental regulations, lower labor standards and wages, anti-green energy policy, and a return to pre-20th century exploitation of federal land for oil and minerals. It's a corporate centered policy based on a theory of job creation that hasn't worked.

It's not just infrastructure either. If Republicans are successful at removing the safety nets, future generations will be left reinstating those programs at an even greater cost, making the GOP platform a mindless waste of time and another cost shift to our kids. So thanks to Captain Clarion for giving me the chance to sound the alarm: