I pray for President elect Obama and our country. The first thing you need to do sir is just be honest with us.
We have a crisis in leadership. This crisis includes lacking the moral courage or strength of character to tell it like it is and then recommend a well thought out solution, while explaining to the American citizens it is going to take work to right the ship, but it can be done. We all now need to unite, and support the new President, but in return, he needs to be honest with us and admit that the nation is in bad shape and can get a lot worse if we don’t fix it now. If he starts off with the truth, there is hope that we can once again become a powerful nation built on values and hard work.
The election of President elect Barrack Obama showed the world that people can still aspire to be what they dream, but now we must take back from and destroy the greed of the big corporations, special interests and Wall Street (focus on the short term profit of a few at the sacrifice of the many’s future).
The nation’s citizens need to encourage the new President to put it back in strengthening the middle class, and enabling millions of others to join the middle class through brain power and hard work.
Hopefully this will turn out well, but President elect Obama is not in an enviable position and I doubt we know half of it. Once his administration gets to look at the books, I think we will learn we are considerably worse off than we know. I think there will be familiar faces in this administration, but the context in which they work and what is expected of them in terms of honesty and policy formulation will be very different from most previous administrations, even Clintons. I think this guy is honest, has low ego needs, is serious, open, and inclusive and want to make this a better country for the people and the nation.
At least I am going to start off giving him a clean slate of my support. Yes, I supported Ron Paul, but the people have made the decision, and I will now support the President elect. Please read the following article,
What Obama Needs To Do First: Make Clear How Bad It Is
If President Elect-Obama were the incoming CEO of a corporation, he would now be preparing for the first act of his tenure: A massive write-off of the mountains of rotted junk buried on the company’s balance sheet and an announcement that recovery will take a long, long time.
This flush would clear the way for several years of better than expected results. It would also take advantage of the new leader’s one chance to blame the sorry state of the organization on his sorry predecessor.
President Obama began this process last night, in his victory speech, when he noted that restoring the country’s health might take more than a term. In the next few weeks, he should go well beyond this:
- The deficit will be more than $1 trillion a year for several years
- The country needs a massive new fiscal stimulus
- The housing market will continue to decline through at least 2010
- Interest rates and taxes will eventually have to rise (after the economy stabilizes)
- Weak corporations have to be allowed to fail
- Millions of homeowners will lose their house
- Unemployment will probably rise to 10%
- The government simply cannot “bail the country out”–not because it lacks the will, but because it lacks the power.
In short, Obama needs to acknowledge reality, erring on the side of overstating the problems and challenges, and he needs to prepare the country for several tough years. Because if he doesn’t, within six months of his taking office, the country will have forgotten all about the prior administration and will instead be blaming everything on him.
Amen
M
[...]Because if he doesn’t, within six months of his taking office, the country will have forgotten all about the prior administration and will instead be blaming everything on him.]
Very True.
Major, sir : Unenviable position indeed… with power comes responsibility.
“Millions of homeowners will lose their house”… where are these dudes gonna sleep?
Bad time to talk ’bout this, but methinks the Gov. of US needs to invest on education. Only a skilled workforce with forte in math, engineerin’, economics & finance is gonna create new jobs for the market in the upcomin’ years, instead of relyin’ on “foreign talent”. Or am I flawed with this view? Perhaps we could get Zenpundit & the dude from Selil blog to comment on this.
Get the kids off the streets & start teachin’ ‘em valid skills for job creation. With luck, investors flockin’ to the US in the next decade or so.
求小得 (卦二十九。坎)
Reap small profits. : I Ching, Hexagram #29 K’an
Like learnin’ how to make pastries, ya gotta start small. With re – engineerin’, ya gotta take slow & easy steps ‘fore takin’ on bigger jobs.
MHO.
Best russian security electronic bulletin board. Welcome to http://coru.in/
#
Cult Of Russian Underground
“# The deficit will be more than $1 trillion a year for several years
# The country needs a massive new fiscal stimulus”
These two are connected.
Consider this: Where should the money come from?
(And I assume you meant the federal budget deficit?)
- From domestic market:
“Crowding out”, government spending basically replaces private spending, any stimulus would depend on greater multiplicator effects for government spending – which is unlikely.
- From foreign countries:
The trade balance deficit would grow on the same order – which (if possible to pull off at all) equals an even greater crash due to the trade imbalance.
- From money creation (‘printing’):
Hello, inflation! (Actually, this might work because some indicators tell about a possible deflation – but the dosage makes the poison.)
The Japanese had no good experience with their use of stimulus packages against their stagnation – their public debt is now at about 200% of the GNP.
“# The housing market will continue to decline through at least 2010″
Why? And who cares? The effects of additional decline will imho not be really relevant for the overall situation.
“The government simply cannot “bail the country out”–not because it lacks the will, but because it lacks the power.”
And it cannot change much about the downturn.
In fact, good leadership might require to tell the people that fighting the downturn makes little sense and that the nation should rather accept the downturn and prepare for the recovery in some years.
To do anything because “you need to do something” is often a bad idea because there’s often no known option for action that can improve the situation.
Investment in infrastructure, education and other changes that benefit the industry in the long term are IMHO crucial.
Industrial output of only 20% GNP is simply not enough to meet the expectations for consumption. The industry needs to grow in the long term, to 25 or 30% GNP.
This crisis might last several years, but what’s five or six years? Even on such a short scale of a human life or even only a generation it’s just a short period.
“Consider this: Where should the money come from?”
Answer,
Much higher domestic taxes, much, much, higher.
We’ll see how much enthusiasim Amercans retain
for thier $ 1 trillion ++ a year MILITARY budget,
once the gaumet of middle class pepole (those who are lucky enough to remain employed) start paying 45-55% of their gross income in agrigate combined local, state, sales, and federal taxes..
It’s coming.
Then we’ll see, if Americans still have a stomach to continue to try and police re;control, and micro-manage the world.
This is only the begining.
http://tinyurl.com/5a235a
MaX
The problem is that taxes take away money from private sector to government – which in turn spends the money instead of the private sector doing so.
That’s fine to finance the government’s mission, but it’s no STIMULUS.
There’s no additional spending (the idea f a stimulus package is to inject additional demand into the economy), and any stimulus effect gained by doing so can only come from better multiplicator effects – which are unlikely or only small advantage and need to be seen in context with the administration costs and other inefficiencies associated with taxes.
The “stimulus” in domestically-financed “stimulus packages” is an illusion.
Sven Ortmann
“The problem is that taxes take away money from private sector to government – which in turn spends the money instead of the private sector doing so.”
Of course not, but the alternative is ?
That’s brilliant analysis, but your not talking to
a 9 year old.
the alternaive Is, as you mention ?
Borrow still more, accumulate still more (forgien) debt ?
Are you as a German (?) willing to advance still more billions
pf your hard earned taxes to further the US folly of the past
8 years ?
Will you personely be advising your elected representatives to do so, moreover, take on a far more active military participation in laces like Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan,
soon also Syria, Iran, against Russia and evntually
China, in keeping with the lunatic American Neo-conservative agenda ?
Well ?
Americans are going to have to face the music, take
responsibility and start PAYING for thier global
imperialist ambitions.
OR, if that dosn’t suite them, forget about it, get thier own house in order and start minding thier own bussiness.
It seems Americans are all to willing to perpetuate this garbage, just so long as they don’t have to pay, directly, and on a very personel level, and as long as the sacrifices are limited and meager.
Once it starts to really cost them, we’ll see.
MaX
I would advise to focus on fixing the systemic problems of the past and accept the crisis – it won’t be less serious if the government tries to stem the tide anyway.
Make sure that the recovery will be good and lead to a sustainable economy instead of into the next bubble.
short term:
- longer, but low unemployment benefits (temporary law for 4 years)
- universal healthcare
- huge increase in infrastructure investments
- huge investment in education – better paid teachers, almost free college, measures to motivate (children of) low-income families to focus on education
- reduction of military spending (the whole, not just the official defense budget) to $ 300 bn
- withdrawal from Iraq in 2009
- quit NAFTA, enter free trade with high income industrialized countries only
- repair the financial sector with a rule set that prevents a repetition of this gigantic mis-allocation of resources
- educate the public that ‘more consumption’ and a ‘house for every family’ are luxury, not a solution for problems
- bailout only few car producers – their products are exceedingly similar anyway. I propose Ford and GM only and this by buying new shares at low price (they have European subsidiaries that can transfer crucial know how about internationally competitive cars)
long term (this is about many small levers in policy):
- trade balance needs to be almost balanced
- public debt must not raise above 70% GNP
- industrial output needs to be 25% or more of GNP
- savings rate needs to be at about 10% GNP (this is likely already achieved if the trade balance is healthy)
- repair the outdated 18th century political system
————-
“Will you personely be advising your elected representatives to do so, moreover, take on a far more active military participation in laces like Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan,
soon also Syria, Iran, against Russia and evntually
China, in keeping with the lunatic American Neo-conservative agenda ?”
There’s no inclination to do anything like that in Germany. Afghanistan ISAF is already a stretch and faces a majority opposition. Germany is not involved in any Pakistan/Syria/China conflicts, uses EU diplomacy on Iran and officially opposed the Iraq war.
“Americans are going to have to face the music, take
responsibility and start PAYING for thier global
imperialist ambitions.”
Nope, they don’t. Those ambitions won’t exist in 2010 anymore. But they need to work for all of their their own consumption in the future.
In the UK as in USA there seems to be the assumption – probably correct – that after a few years mild austerity we will return to 2005 and carry on up .
Sweatshops will sweat again , peasants on the edge of deserts will still hold their hands out for our aid , young men will continue to kill each other , and we will continue with investment , fiscal policies , technology and consumption as before . The feudal model perhaps , on a global scale .
Or are we near a tipping point to some sort of new order ? My sketchy knowledge of history doesnt help me find a model of a successful society that would fit the world . Tribes , kibbutz , communes , dictators, anarchy , have so far , failed. Democracy favours the majority but leaves the minorities in danger .
Maybe sociologists , historians , psychologists and religious leaders should be leading the debate rather than economists …
There are going to be widespread protests within the UK and US within the year.
The economy is terribly broken, credit still is not available for anyone or any corporation, the Baltic Dry Index has collapsed (meaning that global trade has collapsed), crude oil prices are plummetting (meaning that demand has collapsed), and unemployment is going to rise for at least the next 4-12 quarters. Yes, quarters, not months.
Obama and whomever the British bloke is (Gordo is on thin ice and is about to plunge into the Loch) are going to have the mother of all shit sandwiches to deal with.
And let’s not forget ol Binny Ladeen and his strategic center of gravity, which was to bankrupt the United States and then the West. Seems he might be on to something there…
“Once it starts to really cost them, we’ll see.”
MaX
More evidence the US has big plans and is desperate for vastly increased internal tax revenue.
These are early days, you ain’t seen noth’in yet.
Americans will be paying, and paying a LOT more,
then still more, and for a long time, particuarly for decisions and conciquences of the last 8 years.
M
http://tinyurl.com/6fhqjg
“Obama advisors estimate the measure could raise at least $50bn (£32bn) per year in lost US tax revenues,”
For those who may have missed this.
http://tinyurl.com/6r6f3a
“Review: The Three Trillion Dollar War
Kyi May Kaung | November 3, 2008″
Editor: John Feffer
Foreign Policy In Focus http://www.fpif.org
As Arianna Huffington writes, “the thing about $3,000,000,000,000 is that, at a certain point, it becomes hard to ignore.” Pundits are saying we’re already in a recession. The connection between the war and the economy is increasingly clear and starting to affect everyone, from those worrying about retirement to John McCain’s Joe the Plumber.
The Bush administration and the mainstream media seldom mention the economic costs of Iraq and Afghanistan. But Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University, a 2001 Nobel laureate, and Linda Bilmes of Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government rectify this oversight in their new book, The Three Trillion Dollar War. Their gargantuan estimate for the Iraq War’s bill considers various factors, including budget expenditures, the veteran care, unbudgeted macroeconomic costs (such as soldiers having to buy their own body armor), and the opportunity costs of everything we forego because of war expenditures. The authors often had to file for access under the Freedom of Information Act for these estimates, as figures that should have been in the public domain were kept hidden. Even then, their $3 trillion price tag is conservative, as even immediate withdrawal from Iraq comes with a hefty cost.
Stiglitz and Bilmes point out that the U.S. government financed the war mainly through deficit spending. After 9/11, Bush told the American people to “go out and spend,” implying that the United States could fight the war without making any sacrifices U.S. citizens could continue their high-spending lifestyles.
But, they say, there is
Little doubt that had we spent one to two trillion dollars differently, we would actually be more secure…had we spent the money in investments in education, technology, and research, growth would have been higher, and we would have been in a far stronger position to meet future challenges. If some of the money spent on research were devoted to alternative energy technologies, or to providing further incentives for conservation, we would be less dependent on oil…[w]hat is clear is that there were a myriad of ways in which we could have spent the money better — leaving the country more secure, and more prosperous, and so better prepared to face future threats.
“Maybe sociologists, historians, psychologists, and religious leaders should lead the debate rather than the economists…”
Got to agree with you, Anna. Economists think economics is all about markets & currency exchange.
Trouble brews sooner perhaps , in China and India than the US and UK ; although perhaps there is a point where people are too broken to campaign ( eg Congo ).
I cannot see how we can rebuild a sustainable society on borrowed money . Nor can sustainable societies be built relying on tourism , charity or the export of tat .
Perhaps we could have , globally : Free migration of people . Rationing , a limit on personal wealth . Government by a jury system . Limits of behavior acceptable to all the major religions .
But somewhere on this or a related forum , I read that it causes big trouble , to try and take away from people , privileges to which they have become accustomed .
Trouble’s already brewing in China. Read up on news in Shenzhen. They’re already doing some major rioting in the streets. Workers not getting paid. Some transportation company had employees shanghaied drivers from Hong Kong recently for ransom money. Furniture exports badly hit due to Americans and Europeans not buying en masse.
Can’t really agree with you on migration though. Masses of people would all flock to London, N.Y.C or even singapore. That would cause major cities of the world to become ghettos (if they’re not already). Rationing on personal wealth, yes. A great idea. Especially strict laws on fraud, several associates of mine were victims. They really should implement such laws in south east asian states. Then again, I guess it’s kosher for some to get large amounts of money easily while others have to resort to deception & other unsavoury means…
Recently read ’bout how landlords in singapore have resorted to lying to their tenants and getting away with their rent money. It used to be the other way round, with foreign nationals getting quid through hook or crook. So much for transparency…
Putting aside the fascinating topic of migration ( are we not all from migrant stock , originally from Africa ? how about the reasons birds migrate ? ) .. here is another Q .
What do Al Quida ( spp ) actually want ?
I have heard Obana criticised for ‘ wanting to hob nob with terrorists ‘ .
We had this attitude to IRA until recently . Talking to them has brought a fair approximation to peace . The cruelties of the past – for which most of us bear no genetic or cultural responsibilty whatsoever – were boxed up and set aside , as were the blood feuds and crimes of recent years . Hard to do .
I worked in Birmingham UK in ’70’s , daily checking my car , counting my exit routes . We were told to carry on with normal life as to add more controls would pander to the terrorists desire to disrupt . ( which is why I find the current controls irritating .) We regarded the N Irish as a bunch of religious nuts , financed by religious nuts in US , and if it hadnt been for referendums in N I where the majority wished to stay with UK , we would have been happy to see troops home and leave them to fight it out themselves . ( Bit like most feel about Iraq and Afghanistan now . )
After the Agreement , turned out the Catholics had had some perfectly legitimate grievances – mainly due to discrimination and unemployment . ( This also gave IRA a chance to save face while backing down . ) Had these issues been sorted sooner , a lot of lives might have been saved .
So does anyone have any idea , what Al Quida want ? And is Obama still thinking of dialogue ?
My educated guess : the fall of the “Great Satan” & the “Little Satan” (israel). Have Americans & other “infidels” leave Arab lands so they could set up another “golden age” of wahabi culture (that’s one of the goals of the groups in south east asia). Maybe to reconquer southern Spain & to have a religious suzerainty stretching from south of Spain to Indonesia.
Don’t think they’re gonna succeed that easily, notwithstanding differing goals with other terrorist groups, nation states are going to crush them like the Russians did with the Chechens. Nope, I seriously doubt these people are willing to negotiate with “infidels” due to mere fact they are of different ethnicity & religious beliefs. That gentleman they’ve chosen as POTUS Elect can give it a shot due to his Arab middle name, I don’t see much likelihood of success though.
An associate of mine mentioned that the Australians had nothing to do with the israeli occupation of the West Bank or with the invasion of Iraq, but they were still summarily dealt with during the Bali bombings. How is anyone going to hold talks with people who want your citizens six feet under? These people are not the Irish Republican Army or the Soviet Russians. They are not westerners, & probably view all of the rest as their sworn enemies.
It is questionable that these terror groups are gaining popularity in Muslim states as well with bombing peoples of the same ethnic & religious background either. Anarchy in the form of failed states (such as Palestine, Lebanon or Iraq) favours terror groups, states like Indonesia, Iran or Arabia are definitely not going to tolerate threats to their sovereignty, despite differences in belief structure.
MHO.
“Blowback” is a CIA term first used in March 1954 in a recently declassified report on the 1953 operation to overthrow the government of Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran. It is a metaphor for the unintended consequences of the US government’s international activities that have been kept secret from the American people. The CIA’s fears that there might ultimately be some blowback from its egregious interference in the affairs of Iran were well founded. Installing the Shah in power brought twenty-five years of tyranny and repression to the Iranian people and elicited the Ayatollah Khomeini’s revolution. The staff of the American embassy in Teheran was held hostage for more than a year. This misguided “covert operation” of the US government helped convince many capable people throughout the Islamic world that the United States was an implacable enemy.
: taken from an article by Chalmers Johnson
That’s “Great Satan” for you.
oE6ekv comment6 ,