As 2009 opened, three weeks before Barack Obama took office, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 9034 on January 2, its highest level since the autumn panic. Yesterday the Dow fell another 4.24% to 6763, for an overall decline of 25% in two months and to its lowest level since 1997. The dismaying message here is that President Obama's policies have become part of the economy's problem.

Americans have welcomed the Obama era in the same spirit of hope the President campaigned on. But after five weeks in office, it's become clear that Mr. Obama's policies are slowing, if not stopping, what would otherwise be the normal process of economic recovery. From punishing business to squandering scarce national public resources, Team Obama is creating more uncertainty and less confidence -- and thus a longer period of recession or subpar growth.

The Democrats who now run Washington don't want to hear this, because they benefit from blaming all bad economic news on President Bush. And Mr. Obama has inherited an unusual recession deepened by credit problems, both of which will take time to climb out of. But it's also true that the economy has fallen far enough, and long enough, that much of the excess that led to recession is being worked off. Already 15 months old, the current recession will soon match the average length -- and average job loss -- of the last three postwar downturns. What goes down will come up -- unless destructive policies interfere with the sources of potential recovery.

And those sources have been forming for some time. The price of oil and other commodities have fallen by two-thirds since their 2008 summer peak, which has the effect of a major tax cut. The world is awash in liquidity, thanks to monetary ease by the Federal Reserve and other central banks. Monetary policy operates with a lag, but last year's easing will eventually stir economic activity.

Housing prices have fallen 27% from their Case-Shiller peak, or some two-thirds of the way back to their historical trend. While still high, credit spreads are far from their peaks during the panic, and corporate borrowers are again able to tap the credit markets. As equities were signaling with their late 2008 rally and January top, growth should under normal circumstances begin to appear in the second half of this year.

So what has happened in the last two months? The economy has received no great new outside shock. Exchange rates and other prices have been stable, and there are no security crises of note. The reality of a sharp recession has been known and built into stock prices since last year's fourth quarter.

What is new is the unveiling of Mr. Obama's agenda and his approach to governance. Every new President has a finite stock of capital -- financial and political -- to deploy, and amid recession Mr. Obama has more than most. But one negative revelation has been the way he has chosen to spend his scarce resources on income transfers rather than growth promotion. Most of his "stimulus" spending was devoted to social programs, rather than public works, and nearly all of the tax cuts were devoted to income maintenance rather than to improving incentives to work or invest.

His Treasury has been making a similar mistake with its financial bailout plans. The banking system needs to work through its losses, and one necessary use of public capital is to assist in burning down those bad assets as fast as possible. Yet most of Team Obama's ministrations so far have gone toward triage and life support, rather than repair and recovery.

AIG yesterday received its fourth "rescue," including $70 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program cash, without any clear business direction. (See here.) Citigroup's restructuring last week added not a dollar of new capital, and also no clear direction. Perhaps the imminent Treasury "stress tests" will clear the decks, but until they do the banks are all living in fear of becoming the next AIG. All of this squanders public money that could better go toward burning down bank debt.

The market has notably plunged since Mr. Obama introduced his budget last week, and that should be no surprise. The document was a declaration of hostility toward capitalists across the economy. Health-care stocks have dived on fears of new government mandates and price controls. Private lenders to students have been told they're no longer wanted. Anyone who uses carbon energy has been warned to expect a huge tax increase from cap and trade. And every risk-taker and investor now knows that another tax increase will slam the economy in 2011, unless Mr. Obama lets Speaker Nancy Pelosi impose one even earlier.

Meanwhile, Congress demands more bank lending even as it assails lenders and threatens to let judges rewrite mortgage contracts. The powers in Congress -- unrebuked by Mr. Obama -- are ridiculing and punishing the very capitalists who are essential to a sustainable recovery. The result has been a capital strike, and the return of the fear from last year that we could face a far deeper downturn. This is no way to nurture a wounded economy back to health.

Listening to Mr. Obama and his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, on the weekend, we couldn't help but wonder if they appreciate any of this. They seem preoccupied with going to the barricades against Republicans who wield little power, or picking a fight with Rush Limbaugh, as if this is the kind of economic leadership Americans want.

Perhaps they're reading the polls and figure they have two or three years before voters stop blaming Republicans and Mr. Bush for the economy. Even if that's right in the long run, in the meantime their assault on business and investors is delaying a recovery and ensuring that the expansion will be weaker than it should be when it finally does arrive.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123604419092515347.html

As for disagreeing with me, I hope you don't mind standing in line! :thumbup: I suppose time will tell. I HOPE I'm wrong, but I don't believe I am.

the line is so friggin long, i've put up a tent.

the line is so friggin long, i've put up a tent.

HAHAHA!! May as well be comfortable! :thumbup:

Hey, I know that my views aren't popular, especially with people more liberal than myself, but I rag on ALL of 'em. I promise.

Obama Wants to Control the Banks

There's a reason he refuses to accept repayment of TARP money.

I must be naive. I really thought the administration would welcome the return of bank bailout money. Some $340 million in TARP cash flowed back this week from four small banks in Louisiana, New York, Indiana and California. This isn't much when we routinely talk in trillions, but clearly that money has not been wasted or otherwise sunk down Wall Street's black hole. So why no cheering as the cash comes back?

My answer: The government wants to control the banks, just as it now controls GM and Chrysler, and will surely control the health industry in the not-too-distant future. Keeping them TARP-stuffed is the key to control. And for this intensely political president, mere influence is not enough. The White House wants to tell 'em what to do. Control. Direct. Command.

It is not for nothing that rage has been turned on those wicked financiers. The banks are at the core of the administration's thrust: By managing the money, government can steer the whole economy even more firmly down the left fork in the road.

If the banks are forced to keep TARP cash -- which was often forced on them in the first place -- the Obama team can work its will on the financial system to unprecedented degree. That's what's happening right now.

Here's a true story first reported by my Fox News colleague Andrew Napolitano (with the names and some details obscured to prevent retaliation). Under the Bush team a prominent and profitable bank, under threat of a damaging public audit, was forced to accept less than $1 billion of TARP money. The government insisted on buying a new class of preferred stock which gave it a tiny, minority position. The money flowed to the bank. Arguably, back then, the Bush administration was acting for purely economic reasons. It wanted to recapitalize the banks to halt a financial panic.

Fast forward to today, and that same bank is begging to give the money back. The chairman offers to write a check, now, with interest. He's been sitting on the cash for months and has felt the dead hand of government threatening to run his business and dictate pay scales. He sees the writing on the wall and he wants out. But the Obama team says no, since unlike the smaller banks that gave their TARP money back, this bank is far more prominent. The bank has also been threatened with "adverse" consequences if its chairman persists. That's politics talking, not economics.

Think about it: If Rick Wagoner can be fired and compact cars can be mandated, why can't a bank with a vault full of TARP money be told where to lend? And since politics drives this administration, why can't special loans and terms be offered to favored constituents, favored industries, or even favored regions? Our prosperity has never been based on the political allocation of credit -- until now.

Which brings me to the Pay for Performance Act, just passed by the House. This is an outstanding example of class warfare. I'm an Englishman. We invented class warfare, and I know it when I see it. This legislation allows the administration to dictate pay for anyone working in any company that takes a dime of TARP money. This is a whip with which to thrash the unpopular bankers, a tool to advance the Obama administration's goal of controlling the financial system.

After 35 years in America, I never thought I would see this. I still can't quite believe we will sit by as this crisis is used to hand control of our economy over to government. But here we are, on the brink. Clearly, I have been naive.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123879833094588163.html

Did you know that before Jesus returns for the second time to this earth to take it back from the hands of government and to rule and reign as King, that the people will be run by a one world leader and all of the currency would be global currency? Before this could happen, Israel needed to form as a nation once again. People never thought that would ever happen, but it did in 1948. Now there is talk in the UN of a global currency. The christians are excited because we can see that the wheels are turning towards a one world government, and thought that could never happen. Now we see it could be very possible in the near future. It's not that we christians want this kind of thing to be, it's just that these things are predicted to happen before He returns, so when we see them happening in our time, we know his return is near. So, even if we don't like it, these things need to happen, and will happen, if the bible is to be true. There will be a one world leader that the people will be swayed by who claims he will be able to 'fix' everything and that person will set up an economic system. (who that is, I don't know) No one will be able to buy or sell anything without some sort of mark on his hand or his forehead. (this mark is unknown, but it may be a chip that is inserted as your ID and debit card)

Why do you keep asking me about California? Why do you have to get all personal and insulting? I was giving you more credit than that. I guess I was wrong about that, eh?

And again, nothing changed with your post, I peacefully rest my case.

Go peddle your nonsense to someone else.

Why do you keep asking me about California? Why do you have to get all personal and insulting? I was giving you more credit than that. I guess I was wrong about that, eh?

I'm so sorry, it's just that you kept proving time and again with all of your posts towards me that you could only GET personal rather than deal in facts, so I thought that was the way you chose to converse. And I have not been wrong about that.

And again, nothing changed with your post, I peacefully rest my case.

You peacefully stick your head back in the sand so that all we see is your rear again. Eh, to each his own.

Go peddle your nonsense to someone else.

So... NOTHING to say about data that proves the cost they are to us. I would toss you out on your ear right along with them if it was possible because you're worse than them.

Facts and statistics = nonsense. Oh wait, look who I'm talkin' too. Of COURSE it does, darlin'! Bless your heart.

You people are lunatics.

I asked you questions that you never answered. You have done nothing to prove any of your points. You have only spouted the same propaganda that Rush Limbaugh spews. Are you on Oxy?

What question did you ask that I didn't answer? I specifically went almost line-by-line to answer your questions. Ask me now, and I will answer again.

ad yet you belittle me because I haven't answered questions - to your liking.

I can't see where you even attempted to answer ANY of my questions. Want me to ask again?

suck an egg.

Seriously? That's the best you could come up with after dodging my questions?

Calm down, we are NOT entirely Socialist. I say entirely, not because of a new government but because of an ongoing one.

I believe we are a Capitalist society with a Socialist twist, and we have been for a long time. This is a good thing!

Our taxes go to pay for "benefits" not only for all citizens, but also for underprivileged ones. Our poor and disabled citizens are examples of benefactors to this form of "Socialism". We could do what less generous societies do and have them fend for themselves (survival of the fittest), but we try to keep our citizens out of the gutters.

I think you're getting the humane aspect of socialism confused with the political aspect of socialism. I don't want the government to run banks, real estate, the auto industry, or healthcare.

When certain companies have been offered bailouts to keep them afloat and they take some of this money to stuff excess $ in the pockets of those who are used to living high on the hog, you have an example of the worst reason to support "Capitalism".

It is deplorable to think that some fat cat is getting my tax dollars as a bonus for running a company in the ground. However, it was Congress (specifically Chris Dodd) and Obama's treasury secretary (Geithner) that wanted those bonuses to be paid. So, it's not the fault of capitalism, per se, as much as it was political manuvering.

The reason government hasn't enforced our border laws is because we have elected people who cater to the corporations, those corporations who then make sure that those elected officials are taken care of by making them wealthy too.

So...now that we've elected somebody that doesn't cater to the corporations, are you predicting that illegal immigration will decrease?

About global warming: I heard a guy who's written a book from a right wing viewpoint, who says that Al Gore lies about global warming. I'd like a good example of that. Everything that he's been yelling about for years is coming true.

Do you understand how bad it will be if the polar ice cap melts? Do you understand what the polar ice cap does for the earth to keep it an habitable environment for human beings? Do you know that it is predicted that if we don't change our ways, that the melting of the polar ice cap could happen in 30 years? How's that for leaving an inheritance for your children. They won't even have to worry about the deficit.

There are a lot of respected scientists that are unsure of global warming. Do I believe in it? Maybe......I don't know. I do know that it has been politicized beyond belief. And do you understand that the majority of the countries of the world have flatly refused to do anything to curb pollution? India and China are two of the biggest culprits.

Reagan and Bush were for MORE government. More is what you got under those guys, not less!! They have made fools of people who believed what they said.

Not so much Reagan, but Bush ab-so-lutely went against his conservative ideals and spent waaaaay too much.

The idea that Obama has of making the top one percent of Americans pay 3 additional percent of taxes doesn't even begin to burden those folks with the kind of taxes they used to pay.

Well.....kinda. In 1942 FDR proposed a 100% tax on anything above $110,000 / year (luckily that didn't go through). In 1963, anything over $400,000 was taxed at 91% (guess when putting money overseas in Switzerland came into vogue?). When I gripe about the unfair tax burden, it's not just about a paltry 3% increase......it's also about a crippling death tax, a stifling capital gaines tax, etc.

When I gripe about the unfair tax burden, it's not just about a paltry 3% increase......it's also about a crippling death tax, a stifling capital gaines tax, etc.

Especially when there is SO much waste. It's not like they even try to pretend to be fiscally responsible. WE all have to buckle down, tighten the belts, and do without while the government continues to live as if it's 1999 and the party has just begun.

As for BJean being capable of answering questions and addressing hard-core facts, I think she has erased all doubt that she does not have that ability. Want to drive a liberal completely nuts? Pelt them with facts. They melt down. Every. Single. Time. Dodge and spin, dodge and spin, change the topic, call people names and tell them to suck an egg, then skulk away while lobbing immature dingleberry bombs at those who stand there wondering wtf. Oh, well... it's that type of behavior which has helped get us where we are today. Hope they're proud of themselves.

I fully respect you all's right to speaking your mind, but when you start quoting stats, and you do not back it up, then I think you should be called on it.

And when you are provided those stats and choose instead to stick your head in the sand rather than facing facts, you should be called on it as well.

Why do you have to get all personal and insulting? I was giving you more credit than that. I guess I was wrong about that, eh?

"Where were all you buggers..."

"Broaden your horizons."

"You might learn something."

"I can't imagine what kind of life you have. It must be depressing as heck to live in your head."

"Obviously you don't think that shoe fits you because you don't watch Fox and you have many and varied sources for keeping abreast of all things political, eh? Well good for you!"

"Whoo-hoo, gotcha stirred up, did I?"

"Oh Beth, you're a mess!"

"You're so brainwashed you'll never get it until it all unfolds and you will see it and live through it like I have."

"You people are lunatics."

"Are you on Oxy?"

"Go suck an egg."

"For you to be totally anti-government is unAmerican!"

"Go peddle your nonsense to someone else."

[The preceding nonsense was brought to you by BJean. Notice how non-insulting and non-personal she is.]

Um, yeah... whatever.

The sad thing, BJean, is that I am sure there are a lot of great people out there who happen to be liberals who are not such intentionally misguided zealots. However, yours is the face of the liberal party that is most prominent, even if it makes up only a fraction of overall liberals -- people who are dishonest, vile, all hormonal emotion with no depth or content, and who tell others to go out and learn something all the while refusing to look at data that flies in the face of their skewed agenda.

You choose instead to walk in hard-core lock step with the liberal pinheads who are doing all they can to socialize this country and take away our rights -- something I THOUGHT you were against. Or was that only when speaking about Bush? Because it seems to me, if Bush did it, it was evil. If Obama expands and does it, it's wonderful. You and I know damn well that if Bush was in office and making these decisions, you'd be screaming like a Yeti.

Your arguments about how WE must be spoon fed by FOX or Rush, when you are a walking, talking CNN/MSNBC/Michael Moore advertisement is rather hilarious. Especially since I don't watch or listen to either. Maybe... just MAYBE... we conservatives are on the same page without the need to toe the party line.

You spew about global warming when more scientists have called it bullshit than those who say it's fact. The "global warming" lie is yet another way for government to bully its way into people's lives and create more socialist policies. It's no wonder you don't see it. Hell, even if you did, you seem to think, based on past comments, that socialism -- while it's "not happening" (yeah, right) -- would be okay if it was.

You really don't deserve to live here. My ancestors fought and died for our freedoms; many fought against the tyrants of England who tried to dictate people's lives into the ground -- and won -- only to have apathetic sheeple such as yourself come around 200 years later and say that what has never worked will somehow work now.

In all honesty, your intelligence appears to begin and end with the fact that you can write coherent (if misguided and ignorant) posts with proper grammar and spelling. Beyond that, you are a liberal lackey who has proven yet again that, for many of you, thinking is not a requirement. Just toe the party line, chant, "We are Borg," and shout down the opposition.

If or when you can actually participate in a debate AND look at factual information -- and put down the Kool-Aid -- I'm afraid you are not worth my time. I prefer thinking types, even ones I disagree with.

Can you imagine for a minute how these three things would improve things in this country?...

1) Term limits, term limits, term limits!!!!!

2) Tax reform, i.e., national sales tax

3) Torte reform (specifically medical malpractice)

Wow. I wish John Lennon were alive to write a song about that....

Can you imagine for a minute how these three things would improve things in this country?...

1) Term limits, term limits, term limits!!!!!

2) Tax reform, i.e., national sales tax

3) Torte reform (specifically medical malpractice)

Wow. I wish John Lennon were alive to write a song about that....

Omg, you have got it SOOOOOOO right!!!

The only one who has term limits is the president, which makes NO sense since the ones who create these insane laws which change our lives are the Senate and Congress. Real bright there.

Sorry Beth, I can't take the time to read your posts because they are so long. And here I thought I won the prize for that. You out B.S.'d me. Congratulations.

plain I wasn't directing my post to you. I wasn't accusing you of not answering a question. But you do dodge things that you don't like by raising a different subject. We all do it and you're good at that.

I gave up last week. The week is young and I am already one beaten down puppy. I had hope that I might inspire somebody to watch and read people who don't disagree with them, but in most cases that's not going to happen. Beth, for instance, is having too much fun doing what she's doing. I am crying "uncle!" What happened to the fairness doctrine? :thumbdown:

Did you know that before Jesus returns for the second time to this earth to take it back from the hands of government and to rule and reign as King, that the people will be run by a one world leader and all of the currency would be global currency? Before this could happen, Israel needed to form as a nation once again. People never thought that would ever happen, but it did in 1948. Now there is talk in the UN of a global currency. The christians are excited because we can see that the wheels are turning towards a one world government, and thought that could never happen. Now we see it could be very possible in the near future. It's not that we christians want this kind of thing to be, it's just that these things are predicted to happen before He returns, so when we see them happening in our time, we know his return is near. So, even if we don't like it, these things need to happen, and will happen, if the bible is to be true. There will be a one world leader that the people will be swayed by who claims he will be able to 'fix' everything and that person will set up an economic system. (who that is, I don't know) No one will be able to buy or sell anything without some sort of mark on his hand or his forehead. (this mark is unknown, but it may be a chip that is inserted as your ID and debit card)

Hey everybody!! Look busy!! Jesus is coming!!

Who are "these people" that you keep referring to BethfromVA?? Your posts are kind of disturbing. Everyone is entitled to an opinion but the "these people" remarks are sort of unnerving!!