Obama

If you want to beat Obama, Ron Paul is your choice

January 2nd, 2012 12:52 am  |  by  |  Published in Caucus, Election, Liberty, Maven Commentary, Obama, Politics, Polling, Ron Paul  |  Comments Off

The final Public Policy Polling Iowa Caucus poll has just come out. The final tally is: Ron Paul 20%, Mitt Romney 19%, Rick Santorum 18%, and the rest further back. Even after being attacked incessantly for over a week about his newsletters, Ron Paul is still in the lead though the attacks seemed to have had an affect. His overall poll numbers are down 4%.  This poll is likely the most accurate because it doesn’t exclude itself to Republicans. In Iowa, no matter your party you can show up and register as a Republican then vote/caucus for the candidate of your choice.

It seems to me that this process is more open and most like a general election. To win the general you need independents and party-switchers. This is why Ron Paul is in the best position to beat Obama. He wins in those segments in poll after poll. Something that should negate any question of “electability”.

Following the results, something the PPP folks noted on Twitter was the following:

Young voters and indys unusual winning formula for GOP caucus but if Paul really gets them out he can win.

This comment is specific to Iowa, but Iowa is probably the best microcosm we have at this time of a general election. Paul is rather notorious for getting supporters out to vote for him. He wins or places in just about every straw poll in the country, including a very close 2nd in this summer’s Iowa Ames Straw Poll. So that is truly the bottom line, if Paul’s unusual strategy works then he can win Iowa. And that unusual strategy happens to be the exact strategy to take votes away from Obama in the general election.

Some of Paul’s detractors make the claim he’d be “dangerous for America”. Well, okay, that depends upon how you define America. If by America you mean the statist-status-quo in Washington DC and Obama’s re-election chances then yes, he’s extremely dangerous for America.

If by America you mean the country of “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none” and if by America you mean a country that places individual liberty as its highest value then Ron Paul would be the best friend America ever had.

So yes, if you want to beat Obama, Ron Paul is your choice, but he’s also so much more than that.

Obama Gets Real

December 9th, 2011 8:04 pm  |  by  |  Published in Economics, government spending, Market Regulation, Obama, Peter Schiff  |  1

by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital and host of the nationally syndicated Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from 10am to noon ET every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com

For most of his time as a national political figure, Barack Obama has been careful to cloak his core socialist leanings behind a veil of pro-capitalist rhetoric. This makes strategic sense, as Americans still largely identify as pro-capitalist. However, based on his recent speech in Osawatomie, Kansas, the President appears to have reassessed the political landscape in advance of the 2012 elections. Based on the growth of the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the recent defeat of Republicans in special elections, he has perhaps sensed a surge of left-leaning sentiment; and, as a result, he finally dropped the pretense.

According to our President’s new view of history, capitalism is a theory that has “never worked.” He argues that its appeal can’t be justified by results, but its popularity is based on Americans’ preference for an economic ideology that “fits well on a bumper sticker.” He feels that capitalism speaks to the flaws in the American DNA, those deeply rooted creation myths that elevate the achievements of individuals and cast unwarranted skepticism on the benefits of government. He argues that this pre-disposition has been exploited by the rich to popularize policies that benefit themselves at the expense of the poor and middle class.

But Obama’s knowledge of history is limited to what is written on his teleprompter. And his selection of the same location that Teddy Roosevelt used to chart an abrupt departure into populist politics is deeply symbolic in the opposite way to that which he intended. It is not by some genetic fluke that Americans distrust government. It is an integral and essential part of our heritage. The United States was founded by people who distrusted government intensely and was subsequently settled, over successive generations, by people fleeing the ravages of government oppression. These Americans relied on capitalism to quickly build the greatest economic power the world had ever seen – from nothing.

But according to Obama’s revisionist version of American history, we tried capitalism only briefly during our history. First, during the Robber Barron period of the late 19th Century, the result of which was child labor and unprecedented lower-class poverty. These ravages were supposedly only corrected by the progressive policies of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. We tried capitalism again in the 1920s, according to Obama, and the result was the Great Depression. This time, it allegedly took FDR’s New Deal to finally slay that capitalist monster. Then, the account only gets more farcical. Apparently, we tried capitalism again under George W. Bush, and the result was the housing bubble, financial crisis, and ensuing Great Recession. Obama now argues that government is needed once again to save the day.

This view is complete fiction and proves that Obama is not qualified to teach elementary school civics, let alone serve as President of the United States. I wonder what other economic system he believes we followed prior to the 1890s and 1920s (and during the 1950s and 1960s) that that he now seeks to restore? Capitalism did not start with J.P. Morgan in 1890s or John D. Rockefeller in the 1920s as the President suggests. In fact, it was about that time that capitalism came under attack by the progressives. We were born and prospered under capitalism. The Great Depression did not result from unbridled capitalism, but from the monetary policy of the newly created Federal Reserve and the interventionist economic policies of both Hoover and Roosevelt – policies that were decidedly un-capitalist.

The prosperity enjoyed during mid-20th century actually resulted from the incredible progress produced by years of capitalism. Contrary to Obama’s belief, the New Deal and Great Society did not create the middle class; it was, in fact, a direct result of the capitalist industrial revolution. The socialist programs of which Obama is so fond are the reasons why the middle class has been shrinking. America’s economic descent began in the 1960s, when we abandoned capitalism in favor of a mixed economy. By mixing capitalism with socialism, we undermined economic growth, and reversed much of the progress years of laissez-faire had bestowed on average Americans. The back of the middle class is being broken by the weight of government and the enormous burden taxes and regulation place on the economy.

America’s first experiment with socialism, the Plymouth Bay Colony, ended in failure, and our most successful colonies – New York, Virginia, Massachusetts  – were begun primarily as commercial enterprises. When the founding fathers gathered to write the Constitution, they represented capitalist states and granted the federal government severely limited powers.

Apparently, Obama thinks our founders’ mistrust of government was delusional, and that we were fortunate that far wiser groups of leaders eventually corrected those mistakes. The danger, as Obama sees it, is that some Republicans actually want to reverse course and adopt the failed ideas espoused by great American fools like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin.

The President unknowingly illustrated his own contradictory thinking with the importance he now places on extending the temporary payroll tax cuts. If all that stands between middle-class families and abject poverty is a small tax cut, imagine how much damage the far more massive existing tax burden already inflicts on those very households! If Obama really wants to relieve middle-class taxpayers of this burden, he needs to reduce the cost of government by cutting spending. After all, there is no way to pay for all the government programs Obama wants by simply by taxing the rich.

History has proven time-and-again that capitalism works and socialism does not. Taking money from the rich and redistributing it to the poor does not grow the economy. On the contrary, it reduces the incentives of both parties. It lowers savings, destroys capital, limits economic growth, and lowers living standards. Maybe Obama should take his eyes off the teleprompter long enough to read some American history. In fact, he could start by reading the Constitution that he swore an oath to uphold.

New Special Report: For an in-depth look at the prospects of international currencies, download Peter Schiff’s and Axel Merk’s Five Favorite Currencies for the Next Five Years.

 

Subscribe to Euro Pacific’s Weekly Digest: Receive all commentaries by Peter Schiff, John Browne, and other Euro Pacific commentators delivered to your inbox every Monday!
For a great primer on economics, be sure to pick up a copy of Peter Schiff’s hit economic parable, How an Economy Grows and Why It Crashes.

 

President Obama Announces Plan to Boost College Tuitions

October 26th, 2011 8:40 pm  |  by  |  Published in Economics, Obama, Peter Schiff  |  1

by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of  The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com.


President Obama today announced a plan that will ensure students are able to commit to higher levels of federally backed student loans. By limiting student obligations to repay, and by passing more of the repayment burden onto taxpayers, colleges and universities will be able to continue to raise tuitions at a rate that outpaces nearly every other cost center in the American economy. The move will come as a great relief to an education establishment increasingly concerned that students might no longer be able to afford skyrocketing tuition rates.

The AP reported today that state support for higher education has fallen 23% after accounting for inflation over the last ten years, even as tuitions have risen 5.6% faster than CPI. This gap has been bridged by a whopping 57% increase in federal student loans over the same time period due to the increased cost of tuition and number of student enrollment. Read More »

Should Congress Impeach the President?

October 5th, 2011 10:21 pm  |  by  |  Published in congress, DownsizeDC.org, Obama  |  2 Responses

Quote of the Day: “It isn’t illegal if the President does it.” — Richard M. Nixon

We have re-launched a campaign to impeach the President. The sample letter below will explain why we have done this.

WARNING: Those who maintain partisan loyalties may wrongly believe we are pursuing this campaign for partisan reasons, or out of personal animosity for the President. Nothing could be further from the truth. We want to make this clear . . .

  • Our organization is legally non-partisan, and temperamentally ANTI-partisan.
  • We distrust all political parties, and all politicians.
  • We take NO position for partisan political reasons, for the simple reason that we have NO partisan political loyalties, AT ALL.

Instead, we are doing this because we think the legal situation requires it. The sample letter below will explain in more detail. But . . . out of respect for those who may disagree . . . we are placing this campaign on the “Heresies” page on our website. As always, you are a free to disagree with us, and to tell us you disagree.

On the other hand, if you strongly support our position, you may want to help us notify the media about it (see more details below the sample letter).

The hardwired portion of this campaign’s letter to Congress reads . . .

Please begin impeachment proceedings against the President. Read More »

Job Killer in Chief

September 4th, 2011 11:47 pm  |  by  |  Published in Economics, jobs, Obama, Peter Schiff, unemployment  |  Comments Off

by Peter Schiff, CEO of Euro Pacific Capital, and host of The Peter Schiff Show, broadcasting live from WSTC Norwalk CT from 10am to noon Eastern time every weekday, and streaming at www.schiffradio.com

This morning many on Wall Street were stunned by the big fat zero put up by the August jobs report, the worst showing in 11 months. The data convinced many previously optimistic economists that the United States will slip back into recession. I believe that we have been in one giant recession all along that was only temporarily interrupted by trillions of useless and destructive deficit and stimulus spending.  Unfortunately, the August numbers will increase the talk of government efforts to stimulate the economy.

But while President Obama prepares to unveil a new plan for the Federal Government to create jobs, evidence is rapidly piling up on how his Administration is actively destroying jobs with stunning efficiency. Recent examples of this trend are enough to make anyone with even a casual respect for America’s former economic prowess hang their head in disgust.

Read More »

Obamacare Suffers another Blow

August 15th, 2011 11:11 pm  |  by  |  Published in Activism, congress, Constitution, DownsizeDC.org, Health Care, jobs, Liberty, Market Regulation, Obama, unemployment  |  Comments Off

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday the 12th that Obamacare’s “individual mandate” violates the Constitution. This mandate, which is the foundation of Obamacare, requires individuals to purchase health insurance.

The Supreme Court must now rule on this question, but we shouldn’t have to wait for that.I sent a letter to Congress telling them to repeal Obamacare now.

The hard-wired message says simply, “Please repeal Obamacare.”

I added these comments… Read More »

Obama Demagogues Default

July 25th, 2011 7:20 pm  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, congress, Economics, government spending, Obama  |  Comments Off

by John Browne, Senior Market Strategist at Euro Pacific Capital

President Obama has continued and increased the reckless spending of the previous Administration. Now, as the federal debt reaches its statutory limit, he is spreading fear and panic in the hopes of having it raised.

Many of the key people responsible for America’s historic mess, including the President, Treasury Secretary Geithner, former NEC Director Summers, and Fed Chairman Bernanke, have pronounced publicly that a failure to lift the debt ceiling will cause a catastrophic Treasury debt default.

This is simply not true. The US Treasury has tax revenues that cover the service of its current (staggering) debt of some $14.3 trillion.

Yet, that doesn’t mean the US government won’t be forced to default in other ways. Failure to pay the
nominal interest and principal on bonds is only the narrowest definition of “default.” When a broader definition is used – which includes the use of inflation to erode the real value of US debt – the US government has in fact been in a state of continuous default for almost a century.

A 2011 dollar is worth just four cents in terms of a 1914 dollar. As that new money circulates, your dollar will lose some 53% of its purchasing power, productivity increases notwithstanding. That’s just in the last three years!

Read More »

Cap the Debt: How Congress Can Learn From Truman

June 13th, 2011 9:55 pm  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, congress, Debt, DownsizeDC.org, Economics, government spending, Liberty, national debt, Obama, War  |  Comments Off

Quote of the Day: “History clearly shows the government that stimulates the best, taxes, spends, and intrudes the least. In particular, the lesson from 1945-47 is that a sharp reduction in government spending frees up assets for productive use and leads to renewed growth.” – Economists Jason E. Taylor and Richard K. Vedder

On May 31, the House rejected President Obama’s request to raise the debt limit with no spending cuts. In addition to every Republican, 46% of Democrats opposed this bill.

* This demonstrates the power of polls, which shows even a substantial percentage of Democrats oppose raising the debt ceiling
* But it also demonstrate the power of your RELENTLESS PRESSURE on Congress

More and more Democrats realize the U.S. is on an unsustainable path and that reforms must be implemented NOW instead of putting them off any longer.

The vote was good news, but this is only the beginning of the fight. WE ARE HOLDING THE LINE . . .

NO increase on the debt ceiling.

Unless you tell your Representative and Senators where you stand, they may be tempted to cut a deal which will raise the debt limit while making only symbolic and marginal spending cuts.

Both Democrats and Republicans need to learn from history, particularly the Democratic Truman Administration. That’s why I sent this letter to Congress, from which you may borrow or copy . . . Read More »

Geithner’s Failed Makeover

February 16th, 2011 6:52 pm  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, Debt, Economics, government spending, Liberty, Market Regulation, Obama, Politics  |  Comments Off

by Michael Pento, Senior Economist at Euro Pacific Capital (www.europac.net)

To counter the increasing demands that government reduce its micromanagement of the economy, last week the Obama Administration offered a fig leaf in the form of a white paper entitled “Reforming America’s Housing Finance Market.” In addition to marking the official end of the Bush era “ownership society,” where increasing the level of home ownership was a national priority, the document contains a recommended regulatory overhaul of the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) as well as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (together known as Government Sponsored Enterprises “GSE’s”), that intends to bring the share of government owned home loans from the current 95% to 40% over the next 5-7 years.

In the report, the Obama Administration makes the important admission that government interference in housing had dangerously distorted the market. And, while the goal of reducing the government’s footprint in the housing market is certainly laudable, the reform plan is not only too little too late, but fails miserably to address the nucleus of the problem. Even if all the recommendations are adopted, the government would actually extend its explicit guarantees to bail out failing lenders. Most importantly, the proposal completely overlooks the most significant government distortion of the housing market: the Federal Reserve’s manipulation of interest rates. Thus, this plan will insure that government’s role in the mortgage market will likely expand in the years ahead.

Read More »

Inflation is Here to Stay

February 2nd, 2011 9:20 am  |  by  |  Published in Big Government, Debt, gold standard, government spending, Liberty, national debt, Obama  |  Comments Off

by Michael Pento, Senior Economist at Euro Pacific Capital (www.europac.net).

In current economic analysis, inflation is largely in the eye of the beholder, and depending on how you choose to look, very different stories emerge. In the U.S., food and beverages count for just 16.4% of the CPI calculation. The Chinese apparently believe that the basic necessities of life should count for more, assigning a 33% weight to the nutritional components. These differences in measurement are partially responsible for the divergent inflation climate in both countries, and make most people believe that inflation is fickle and localized. From my perspective, inflation is a global wave that will ultimately swamp all shores.

As the world’s economic leaders gather in Davos Switzerland, much of the discussion has been focused on a report jointly issued by the Global Economic Forum and McKinsey & Co. which forecasts a $100 trillion increase in global debt in the coming decade. The authors of the report argue that such an increase will be needed to maintain global economic health. Strangely, while acknowledging how the massive increase in credit caused the global financial crisis of 2008, the report’s authors admit no fear of even greater leverage today. They conclude: “Credit is the lifeblood of the economy, and much more of it will be needed to sustain the recovery and enable the developing world to achieve its growth potential.”

But the global credit stock has already doubled from $57 trillion in 2000 to $109 trillion in 2009, with disastrous consequences. The WEF report wouldn’t be so alarming if it wasn’t emanating from a gathering of global central bankers, business leaders and politicians. These are, unfortunately, the folks with all the power to turn these ideas into reality.

Read More »