More Happy Talk On Jobs From Obama

President Barack Obama outlined his proposals today to create jobs and make homes more weather resistant. Excuse me, Mr. President, but what you addressed at the Brookings Institute was happy talk.

First, what he proposed.

In addition to proposing a tax cut for small businesses to encourage hiring, he called for eliminating capital gains on these businesses for one year and suggested that money left over from the financial bailout program, the Trouble Asset Relief Program, should be redirected toward small businesses. He also proposed investing new money in roads, bridges and other infrastructure improvements, and offering rebates to people who make their homes more energy efficient.

The president at least acknowledged it was up to Congress to enact the proposals and that the Republicans were acting irresponsibly by claiming further stimulus programs only added to the nation’s growing deficit. To that point he charged:

… Republicans for criticizing his administration’s spending, saying that he inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit when he took office, largely because tax cuts and entitlement programs were not paid for during the last administration.
“These budget-busting tax cuts and spending programs were approved by many of the same people who are now waxing political about fiscal responsibility while opposing our efforts to reduce deficits by getting health care costs under control,” Obama said. “It’s a sight to see.”

Political grandstanding notwithstanding, the crucial problem facing small businesses is the simple fact they cannot borrow money at the same interest rates of those corporations and financial institutions deemed by the government as “too big to fail.”

Compounding the problem is the credit crunch still extends to the consumer in which lending shrank another 1.7% in October, a 3.5% decline amounting to $3.5 billion since its peak in July 2008, according to calculations by the Federal Reserve. Consumer credit activity accounts for two-thirds of U.S. economic growth.

My point, Mr. President, is that you can offer tax credits to encourage hiring and freeze capital gains for a year but if small businesses cannot receive credit to buy inventory and pay its bills all those gimmicks go to naught. And if consumer credit tends to decline who the hell is going to buy their products?

I’m all for the president to use his office as a bully pulpit. But, speak straight to the issue, man. Nix the happy talk and can the excuses. We’ve heard that song before.

  

Author: JERRY K. REMMERS, TMV Columnist

Jerry Remmers worked 26 years in the newspaper business. His last 23 years was with the Evening Tribune in San Diego where assignments included reporter, assistant city editor, county and politics editor.

Share This Post On

2 Comments

  1. Yikes. Where to start?

    Did you read the article you linked to? Because twice in there it addresses what you deem “crucial problem facing small businesses.” Hell, once in the opening sentence:

    President Obama presented a series of initiatives on Tuesday aimed at turning around the nation’s beleaguered job market, paying particular attention to increasing the hiring of small businesses by OPENING LINES OF CREDIT and offering tax breaks to try to lower the double-digit unemployment rate. (emphasis added)

    Also, consumer credit activity does not account for 2/3rds of our economy. I suspect you're trying to say that consumption represents 2/3rds of our economy (it's actually around 70%). Consumption is growing just fine, a 2.9% growth rate in the last quarter.

    Consumer credit is contracting because people are saving more because they took on too much debt. (See: Current 4-5% savings rate up from 1% in 2008.) That's a good thing. Why would you be opposed to people restoring their finances?

  2. That another big proposal is being made is admission of failure of earlier measures, even if left unstated.

    “Spending our way out of this mess” is not merely irresponsible, but crass, given earlier irresponsibility.

    Blaming Bush, after nearly a year of running things himself, makes Obama look bad. Only the below-50-IQ crowd will accept such Bush-bashing.

    What of the measures? Are the energy-saving initiatives, being so late (refurbishment and efficiency improvements were good examples of stimulus measures that could have been included in the first proposal), just a politically-safe example, an attempt to present an impression of (tardy) sensibility, a sop to environmentalists, or a bit of cronyism in that some businesses given favored treatment might be “green” businesses, objects of political and financial favoritism (as any “green energy policy” agenda is likely to do under these people's direction, and which is already openly suspected about those who stand to gain from a likely corrupt-as-well-as-idiotic “cap and trade” scam).

    It also once again raises the question of timing. The EPA's sinister misuse of environmental regulation for political purposes (which is what “global warming” is about, politics) was probably a sop, in part, to fools both at home and attending the Copenhagen environmentalist circus. Perhaps this stimulus measure was pre-emptive political support sought by Obama because the health care “reform” legislation and a number of decisions by Obama and other Dems on this (as with Afghanistan) displease the far lefties and many others (possibly up to roughly half of those who support the “public option,” or who voted for Obama, to use a real-world gauge that's less humiliating than current poll number comparisons to Sarah Palin).

Submit a Comment