Imagine if Obama Had Taken Rush Limbaugh’s Economic Advice
Would we be still mired in a depression and headed towards a ‘double-dip’ recession? My guess is no.
However, I think most of us know from Obama’s America-hating, Marxist background that he had no intention of fixing the economy and all of what he has done to destroy the economy since taking office has been deliberate.
But it is interesting to see people now proposing ideas that Rush Limbaugh had proposed within a week of Obama taking office. Here’s Ace today at AoSHQ: Dick Morris: Make Obama Own the Double-Dip
So how could Obama have gotten the $1.2 trillion in stimulus he thought he needed?
Easy. Give the Democrats the $600 billion in stimulative spending, skip the “ornamental” pork, and give Republicans $600 billion in tax cuts. (My preference: A holiday in the payroll taxes for businesses to encourage hiring and employee retention.)
Not only would he have had his Shock and Awe stimulus, he would have gotten it with more than half of the GOP caucus voting for it, and thus would now have the useful political cover of bipartisan action (not [to] mention the unifying aspect of same — if you coopt your opponents into joining you, they have skin in the game as far as scoring a victory, too.)
But he didn’t. Because he decided he didn’t need Republican votes, and would rather have a delectable partisan victory.
And so we spent a huge amount — $1 trillion plus with interest — to no discernible effect and in fact really can’t shoot another stimulus bullet, even if our lives depended on it. (And, you know, they might.)
And this Bush’s fault?
No, this is the Miserable Failure’s fault.
Now, here is Rush back on January 29, 2009: My Bipartisan Stimulus — Let’s cut taxes, as I want, and spend more, as Obama would like.
There’s a serious debate in this country as to how best to end the recession. The average recession will last five to 11 months; the average recovery will last six years. Recessions will end on their own if they’re left alone. What can make the recession worse is the wrong kind of government intervention.
I believe the wrong kind is precisely what President Barack Obama has proposed. I don’t believe his is a “stimulus plan” at all — I don’t think it stimulates anything but the Democratic Party. This “porkulus” bill is designed to repair the Democratic Party’s power losses from the 1990s forward, and to cement the party’s majority power for decades.
Keynesian economists believe government spending on “shovel-ready” infrastructure projects — schools, roads, bridges — is the best way to stimulate our staggering economy. Supply-side economists make an equally persuasive case that tax cuts are the surest and quickest way to create permanent jobs and cause an economy to rebound. That happened under JFK, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. We know that when tax rates are cut in a recession, it brings an economy back.
Recent polling indicates that the American people are in favor of both approaches.
Notwithstanding the media blitz in support of the Obama stimulus plan, most Americans, according to a new Rasmussen poll, are skeptical. Rasmussen finds that 59% fear that Congress and the president will increase government spending too much. Only 17% worry they will cut taxes too much. Since the American people are not certain that the Obama stimulus plan is the way to go, it seems to me there’s an opportunity for genuine compromise. At the same time, we can garner evidence on how to deal with future recessions, so every occurrence will no longer become a matter of partisan debate.
Congress is currently haggling over how to spend $900 billion generated by American taxpayers in the private sector. (It’s important to remember that it’s the people’s money, not Washington’s.) In a Jan. 23 meeting between President Obama and Republican leaders, Rep. Eric Cantor (R., Va.) proposed a moderate tax cut plan. President Obama responded, “I won. I’m going to trump you on that.”
Yes, elections have consequences. But where’s the bipartisanship, Mr. Obama? This does not have to be a divisive issue. My proposal is a genuine compromise.
Fifty-three percent of American voters voted for Barack Obama; 46% voted for John McCain, and 1% voted for wackos. Give that 1% to President Obama. Let’s say the vote was 54% to 46%. As a way to bring the country together and at the same time determine the most effective way to deal with recessions, under the Obama-Limbaugh Stimulus Plan of 2009: 54% of the $900 billion — $486 billion — will be spent on infrastructure and pork as defined by Mr. Obama and the Democrats; 46% — $414 billion — will be directed toward tax cuts, as determined by me.
Then we compare. We see which stimulus actually works. This is bipartisanship! It would satisfy the American people’s wishes, as polls currently note; and it would also serve as a measurable test as to which approach best stimulates job growth.
I say, cut the U.S. corporate tax rate — at 35%, among the highest of all industrialized nations — in half. Suspend the capital gains tax for a year to incentivize new investment, after which it would be reimposed at 10%. Then get out of the way! Once Wall Street starts ticking up 500 points a day, the rest of the private sector will follow. There’s no reason to tell the American people their future is bleak. There’s no reason, as the administration is doing, to depress their hopes. There’s no reason to insist that recovery can’t happen quickly, because it can.
In this new era of responsibility, let’s use both Keynesians and supply-siders to responsibly determine which theory best stimulates our economy — and if elements of both work, so much the better. The American people are made up of Republicans, Democrats, independents and moderates, but our economy doesn’t know the difference. This is about jobs now.
The economic crisis is an opportunity to unify people, if we set aside the politics. The leader of the Democrats and the leader of the Republicans (me, according to Mr. Obama) can get it done. This will have the overwhelming support of the American people. Let’s stop the acrimony. Let’s start solving our problems, together. Why wait one more day?
Notice that Rush Limbaugh suggested a truly bi-partisan compromise approach to helping the economy back when Obama came into office. Now, some 18 months of Obama’s failed economy-destroying and job-killing policies later, people are finally coming around to suggest things similar to what Rush suggested… last year.
And people wonder why liberals and the MF-ing media hate and smear Rush Limbaugh. They know they can’t challenge him and debate him on the merits of his ideology, because they know it makes complete sense. So, instead, they smear him as a “radical” and “controversial” and “extremist” to try to distract people from the content of what he says. They know if people actually listened to the substance of what he says and compared it to the utter lack of substance of Obama and the Democrats and the MF-ing media and the Left in general, they would realize what all we Rush listeners have known for years… Rush is Right!
Just imagine where we would be today had Obama actually taken Rush’s advice his first week in office, instead of smearing him and going on a personal jihad against him…
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.