Wall Street Weekly | 11/06/2009 11:45 am
Liz Peek: Obama Deaf to Election Warning But May Get Bailed Out
As bad as the recent jobs report is, the president is likely to receive some good news over the next several months …
Bears, Bulls, Chickens and Pigs: wOw’s Wall Street Weekly with Liz Peek (Week of 11/2)
Editor’s Note: Liz Peek is a financial columnist.The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the unemployment rate rose from 9.8% to 10.2% in October, the highest level since 1983. Job losses were primarily in construction, manufacturing and retail, and were worse than expected. This is not good news; the terrible job market clearly weighs on consumer sentiment and spending, slowing the recovery. The debilitating payroll cuts also produced some cranky voters this past Election Day.
All politics may be local, but it is hard not to read national significance into Tuesday’s election results. Voters rallied against high taxes and the worrisome economy, while in Virginia, disillusioned young and independent voters crossed the aisle yet again to elect a long-odds Republican.
Astonishingly, the Obama administration has chalked up this apparent warning shot to circumstances beyond their control. Neither tea parties nor sinking polls or, now, pointed election returns seem to have made the slightest dent in their enthusiasm for policies that the majority of Americans do not embrace. Speaker Nancy Pelosi could barely contain her glee that the Democrats had picked up an extra House seat in New York – all the better to ram health-care legislation through. Remember Obama’s words on the night he was elected? "I will listen to you, especially when we disagree."
Americans are genuinely concerned about their country’s fiscal prospects, and about Obama’s programs that will create even worse deficits down the road. Fundamentally, they are worried that a shrinking number of people are supporting a growing segment of the population. The jobs being "saved" or added currently are mainly government jobs; the private sector continues to lay off workers. Even a caveman (with all due respect) gets that this is an unworkable trend.
In 2007 economist Gary Shilling wrote that 52.6% of Americans received "significant income from government programs, up from 49.4% in 2000 and 28.3% in 1950." These figures included, for 2007, 19 million Americans on food stamps, 57 million receiving Social Security payments, over 4 million collecting income from the Veterans’ Administration and millions more employed by the government. For sure, the figure has risen in the past two years as increasing numbers have received unemployment assistance and as the government has propped up banks and autos.
At the same time, a growing number of Americans do not contribute to our tax roles. The Tax Foundation reports that about one-third of our population files returns but pays no taxes, up from 18% in the early 1980s, while another 20 million Americans do not file returns at all.
This is not about social justice. It’s about a shifting of the economic burden in a way that is unsustainable. As baby boomers approach retirement and begin to receive Social Security, the number of people paying in more than they are taking out is going to shrink yet again. Add to that inevitability the millions that will receive health care under the legislation working its way through Congress and it is no wonder that young voters shifted gears. They see the burden contained in the legislation that Democrats are so eager to adopt. It is worth noting that, in 1980, 55% of Americans were receiving government handouts – a level that ushered in the Reagan revolution.
Read more about: Barack Obama, Cisco, Economy, Gary Shilling, health care, Liz Peek, Nancy Pelosi, News, Obama Administration, Ralph Lauren, U.S., Unemployment, Wall Street Weekly, Warren Buffett
























433 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment
I guess, Paul, the question is — how quickly is it reasonable to expect that Obama turn around a situation that was at minium 8 years in the making? Particularly when the very people who contributed to the "situation" fight him tooth and nail along the way?
The problem, Paul and Sara, is that Obama and his administration aren’t smart enough to turn a recession around. They were far more interested in putting up a pork laden $787 billion stimulus package (which has now been extended aka Stimulus II) which in NO way addressed the jobs or the economy….so on Day One the Obama administration played their cards….it’s special interest programs and repaying his campaign donors in their states with nice little goodies compliments of the taxpayers! Obama missed a golden opportunity to be a hero….to come to the immediate aid of the largest employer of jobs in our country, the small businesses!!
Is Obama stupid or just not interested in actually doing something that will help those Americans out of a job? My guess is that he has always had a hidden agenda….."flatline" the economy and rebuild it a "better" way….socialist left thinking. However, he didn’t expect the American people to catch on so soon.
Obama was always in over his head. Now he has lost the confidence of some of his voters, most of the independents and his own democrats in the White House. How did that happen in only one year? George Bush’s fault? I don’t think so. We never needed a stimulus package. Period. Banks and auto companies needed to fail. When a President tampers with a recession it screws up the recovery process. Recessions are real estate driven and corrected by real estate. Period.
Unfortunately, deber, the president that was in way over his head was GWB — well actually, GWB was a puppet-president with Chaney pulling the strings. GWB was handed the the presidency by the Supreme Court — we liberals took it because we believe in the Constitution. Especially after witnessing the screaming/shouting matches at the Town Halls in August — many of us wish we had taken to the streets at such a travesty.
Barack Obama has kept many of George W. Bush’s policies in place….for a reason….because they worked. The one thing he did change was GITMO and it failed. Bush knew it would take time to legally break it down. The screaming and the shouting in the Town Halls was necessary to get the message out that the healthcare bill, etc. was a trainwreck…another example of this administration’s inability to get something right…for the people.
This administration is coming apart at the seams as more and more concerned Americans pay attention.
I agree Helen, surrender is your best option here! LOL…Deber has her ducks in a row, as usual and her stats and facts are right on target. Sara may want to help you hold up that white flag!
Dems have always been for big government. And now they are using the masses to steal their money and capture the economy of this great Nation. However, this is not a Rep. vs Dems. issue, it is a progressive vs. Conservative issue.
Time to deal with the here and now people, why fall for the distraction of "what was"? Why be manipulated like that? Emotion at the expense of analysis is not a good motto.
So let’s stop running back to the Bush issue, shall we? Let’s deal with the fruad that we have as President now and the agenda to take over our freedoms and economy. Let’s unite and stop this madness.
Then when our country is safe again, we can resume this "party" war…
Well Sara, what stopped you? If your outrage was so pure and righteous why weren’t you out protesting? Why weren’t you out their standing up for your beliefs?
It does not appear that you have been to many town halls or tea parties. With the ocassional exception of individual protestors they were extremely orderly and civil.
So Leight, you attended all the the town meetings across the country — so you can speak personally to the orderliness of all the town meetins — except of course the town meetings which were shown on the news? You must have been very busy. Actually, though I think if you review news tapes from around the country — you will find that the town meetings across the country were demonstrations of just how childish and peevish the far right has become.
The tea parties, town hall meetings, etc — certainly do not generate new support for Republicans (which now only 20% of voters want to be identified with).
deber B wrote, "We never needed a stimulus package. Period."
A small business owner was discussing comments she overheard among her employees this past summer.
Employee A: "I used my tax rebate check to repay a friend for the loan to get my car repaired."
Employee B: "Are you kidding? My electric bill was past due. I was able to catch up, and avoid my power being disconnected."
In a conversation with my cousin this past May: "I don’t know how they [her son and his wife] are going to manage when his unemployment runs out. But he’s fortunate because it’s been extended."
And in September, a friend’s neighbor remarked: "My son got a great deal when he traded his car." "Oh, yes! He took advantage of the Cash for Clunker program."
And in October, a local real estate broker remarked: "Business was good." -referring to the first time buyers $8,000 tax credit.
Finally, a bank executive in Houston - "We’re lending again."
The stimulus package served as an expensive band aide. Perhaps. However, the state of the economy need immediate intervention when Obama came into office. And, no matter who occupied the White House, the crisis was imminent and needed to be addressed swiftly … similar to a patient using crutches until an operation can be afforded and perfomed sucessfully.
I wrote: "… similar to a patient using *crutches until an operation can be afforded and performed successfully."
*To clarify, my usage of the word ‘crutches’ is meant figuratively, rather than literally.
Awww come on now Maizie….surely you have something more profound to say then to sling that worn out mud around? It is you know, the sign that all other debate has become overwhelming.
But I’ll admit that I can’t stand Obama!