Tuesday, October 30, 2012

US Economic Perspective Remains Shaky

USA 2012 Election Return Projection Map
By Clarence Amador

The economic crisis ended in 2009, so why is the US economic outlook still so unstable nowadays? There are plenty of factors why the economy has failed to pick back up because the financial crisis passed. Political gridlock in the united states government makes it impossible to predict what exactly the laws and regulations soon will be. The healthcare mandate which was passed is being litigated in courts , and this mandate could prove expensive to several company owners.

Consumer spending is still at very low levels, and lots of clients are selecting to save rather than splurge. Americans with no jobs in high numbers and many have lost their homes and retirement funds. The national financial debt continues to climb devoid of end in sight, and the price of gas, energy, and foodstuff are at incredible levels. With all of these problems it's no surprise that the perspective for the financial system isn't favourable.

The US economic outlook nowadays reflects many factors. The trade debt for the USA will be over $600 million by the end of 2012. The rate of economic growth is quite small at around 2%. Numerous companies are waiting to see what happens in the presidential elections before making any employing or expansion plans. Job growth is also very low, and the new jobs being made are usually not high wage jobs that promote the middle class.

Numerous economic professionals predict that the poor economy will continue for at least another 18 months, and possibly much longer. Similar things that are bringing down the US economy are also dragging down other economies across the world also. It will take some more time before individuals become more confident regarding their financial condition, and the future of business rules.

The US economic outlook is still uncertain according to some because of the mixed signals given and the changes in direction that the US Government continues to take.

About the Author:

Saturday, October 13, 2012

How To Run For President - A Republican's Guide To The White House

Dog Dancing on Water
First Lesson, Dance Like You Mean it!!!
By Mitt Rome

There comes a time when every politician starts letting you know that the other politicians are to blame for whatever ails the country and they have the secret formula to solve all of the problems. That time always comes around during election season, and heats up for presidential elections.

Republicans have a standard set of talking points that they like bring up, and regardless of what they said before in public, all of their viewpoints must now appeal to the base. Everything from abortion, to gun rights, and to taxes must be reframed to be pro-life, pro-gun lobby, and against any form of taxes.

Abortion rights have been in place since 1972 with little change since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling. No republican president has proposed legislation to change that ruling, but during campaign they've all talked about it.

The republican narrative is based on simple messages that speak to the uneducated masses, or wealthy individuals that stand to gain from having the masses adopt policies that are against their own best interests.

One of these simple messages is lower taxes. It's a no brainer to support lower taxes. It means that in theory you get to keep more of your own money and you keep the government out of your pocket. After all, don't you have better things to do with your tax money than the government? Unfortunately life is not that simple.

Nobody likes paying taxes, but the real question is, do tax cuts actually stimulate the economy? Imperial evidence would tend to suggest that there is no correlation between low taxes leading to economic growth. On the other hand, tax revenue is used to pay for public goods like roads, airports, the sewer system, and sidewalks.

Even if you don't fly or drive, it's likely that those things are still quite important to maintaining your quality of life since they are part of the infrastructure that is used to carry your mail, bring in food that you eat, and bring gas for the car you drive. All of those things have one thing in common; they are public goods that are funded by tax revenue. No one wants to pay for those things, but they improve the quality of life for everyone.

You may argue that you believe in personal responsibility, but how far can you take that argument? Will you grow your own food, have a personal oil well in your back yard where you convert the output to petroleum, and a septic tank and landfill where you deposit your waste, and self-educate yourself. Even if you did have all of those things you would still require things like a system to enforce the rule of law so someone doesn't show up in your kingdom and steal your water, oil, or food.

That scenario may be a bit extreme, but it is a good example that illustrates that most people can't go at it alone. There are benefits that everyone enjoys from tax revenue that has been collected from a wide variety of people.

With all of that said, if you're running for president and you're a republican candidate, you must go all in and claim you want to eliminate taxes, and reduce government. There must be tough talk on international affairs and lean towards the extreme on social issues.

If all of that doesn't pay off in the polls, it's time to not just blame your opponent, but to also blame the liberal media. The reason for lagging poll numbers is never your fault, it's the fault of the crazy liberal media.

There are outrageous convention speeches to empty chairs, and speeches that require so many fact checkers that it could lower the unemployment rate, but if your marathon time just doesn't add up, it could be a sign that your team is losing the race. In that case, maybe a little less pandering to the wackos of your party might actually get you a bit further in your quest to claim victory.

About the Author:

Friday, October 5, 2012

Presidential debate: The aftermath

Reprint from our sister site at www.LouisvillePolitics.com

Louisville, KY – In an earlier article we simply asked the question in regards to the Presidential debate, does anyone care? It would appear that many indeed do. There can be no doubt that Republican challenger Mitt Romney owned President Obama in the first debate of the season.

Many were left to ponder whether Obama’s heart is really in this race at all. The President came off as either bored, under the influence, defeated, or flat didn’t care either way. You can insert your own excuse here ______.

For myself I saw a man who looked like a child getting scolded for having his hand in the cookie jar. Romney did that well in the debate folks. He showed a contrast between a pretender and a leader.

It wasn’t pretty.

But do the debates really matter?

Thanks to social media these days we can get a clearer more accurate picture of instant reactions.
Romney gained an immediate surge amongst independents and undecided voters after just this first debate so it would appear that debates still matter.

What should come as no surprise is the instant downplaying of the significance of the debate itself and the immediate attacks by not only the Obama campaign, which is predictable, but the mainstream as well once again.

While the democrats reluctantly agree Romney won the debate they, with the help of the MSM, downplayed the win as insignificant and decided to go on the offensive against Mitt Romney’s claims. What makes it even funnier?

Obama says Romney owes the American people the truth.

Mr. President, with all due respect to the office, if anyone owes the American people any truth at all, it is you who has been the most secretive, lying, and manipulative President I have seen in my lifetime. I don’t say these things callously.

Lies about your past, your religious leanings, and so many other things frankly scare the hell out of many Americans. The “truth” is that when one gets so wrapped up in their own lies they generally have no choice but to go on the attack against others accusing them of having the same problem.

Besides truth is in the eye of the beholder.

There are always three sides to every story. Yours, mine, and the truth.

Truth is a relevant term to those who choose what they want to believe then distort the “facts” to adhere to what they want the outcome to be.

Sounds like political polling doesn’t it?

The truth is that any candidate running for office will use facts, figures, and argue that they have a plan. Another truth is that for partisan hacks they will never believe anything from their party opponent. Another one?

Not every fact or figure can be logically explained as truth to everyone? Ask any scientist.
In a future article we will address some of the so-called “lies” of Romney’s statements. You will find that they weren’t the lies that the liberal MSM want us to believe. Or the President for that matter.
Mr. President you remind me of a typical man with a bully complex. When you don’t get your way you find a way to blame others and attack them because they found a way to get theirs. When faced with certain accountability you abuse the power of the office we entrusted you with to get the
outcome you want. Need proof?

Check out executive orders of this administration. When given the opportunity to be “Presidential” and defend yourself and your policies face to face you showed us a weak ineffective leader who essentially cowered in fear to Romney.

It is a lot easier to attack someone’s character, morality, and fortitude when hiding behind fictitious campaign ads then it is to say the same things to their face and deal with the consequences. Bullies typically back down when faced with an equal opposing force.

You proved that Wednesday night.

That is a childlike quality not an adult leadership one. And that is one more reason President Obama has failed.

When you lack substance use someone else. The references to Bill Clinton and your administration were insulting to anyone who believed Clinton did a good job. You sir are no Bill Clinton.Nor have you shown any inclination to follow his lead. Until you need him for reelection purposes.

As I have admitted many times over I actually voted for Obama in 2008. Bush was as bad as billed, McCain was no option, and I, being open as always to trying something new, decided to take that chance.

It was the worst vote in my 30 years of voting and one that must be corrected. Mitt Romney showed me why.

No I don’t believe Romney is great, nor do I follow traditional party line thinking. In this election we have two choices (no offense to Gary Johnson or other candidates) we will have either Mitt Romney or Barrack Obama as President for the next 4 years. Of the two do either really stand out as perfect?

Romney simply is …….what we need right now.

A CEO with a lifetime of business experience who actually understands how markets work and has shown himself to be a willing partner to the opposite side. In short someone who can lead by example but be open to the discussion.

Is Romney who he portrays himself to be at all times? Of course not.

With the exception of a very few, many people are not who they portray themselves to be 100% of the time. And that’s ok. That’s human.

Think I’m lying? Be honest about the relationships in your life. Not just your loved ones, but expand that to include your co workers, bosses, and anyone else you come in contact with.

You will find that my statement is true.

I waited a day intentionally to discuss the debate because I was eager to see if Romney would get a fair shake with the MSM or if they would aid and abet Obama once more. Hoping for the former I realized quickly that the latter was happening.

And that’s the saddest part of all.

What did MSM do on Thursday? Instead of being “fair and balanced” when attacking what they consider Romney’s inaccuracies (actually by their own fact checkers words they fall short in proving they were lies), they went on the attack claiming Romney wanted to kill Big Bird and predictably trying to make the so-called 47% argument once again.

Using “Big Bird” as an example of how far out of touch Romney is, by implying that one expenditure was his only way of reducing the deficit, a miniscule expense at any rate admittedly, what they failed to do was see exactly why that statement was important. Considering those same funds account for only 15% of the funding for PBS one can argue they don’t need the money anyway.

No one could rationally believe that a CEO of Romney’s caliber would be stupid enough to think that eliminating public broadcasting funds would fix the economy. But what it did tell us is that Romney is willing to look at expenditures at every level, no matter how great or small, to fix this out of control spending government.

That’s what business leaders do.

Those small things add up to big money.

While Obama’s handlers, like the lying David Axelrod and the complicit MSM media, have decided to hold Romney accountable to his statements ask why the same does not apply to the President himself.

Did we hear any detailed plans on how he would fix the economy or address America’s shortcomings? No. Instead what we hear are once again repeated statements from his 2008 campaign.

Those tactics worked coming on the heels of the Bush failures in some ways.

The President cannot play that card again with any rational voter. We simply know that he has had 4 years to follow through on the claims he made then and has been a dismal failure in his attempts, or lack thereof, to implement them.

Romney won because he was substantive, informative, and showed leadership.

All in contrast to our current President.

Keep it up Gov. Romney. You may not be perfect but you are what we need right now.

I can live with that.

Listen daily from 7-8pm at The Ed Springston Show. Also visit Louisville Politics for more details and in depth coverage of local political and news issues.

Rich white ANTIFA scores again

You are being played. Most know it and either A). they don't care, or B). they are too scared to stand up. The left has decided to creat...