He says he does not want the government to own banks or car companies.   But his actions go beyond [...]]]> Obama does such a great job of saying on thing and doing another.    In blaming others for every ill .    But is was he himself that said “Just words.. Just Speeches”.    That actions are what matters.

He says he does not want the government to own banks or car companies.   But his actions go beyond ownership, to management.  He calls for the firing of the CEO of GM, refuses to let banks pay back their debts (unless he likes what they are doing) and forces a buyout of Chrysler.    These are not the actions of someone that “does not want to be” in this role.

My mother once commented on an interview I had for my new boss.  He had mentioned that he “did not like to be a micro-manager” but could “as needed” and felt that if was needed at “this time”.  She told me at the time “WATCH OUT!   If you can it is because ‘you will’… If you believe it is not the way to manage in your core you will always find another way.  She was right, I dealt with micro-management, constant questioning of decisions and the continued misdirection of projects.   

If Precident Obama truly felt government should not be in these role, he would be working to get them out, he woudl be working to create scenarios to limit government control or offer incentives for others to assist.  None of that is occurring and is discouraged.   These are not the actions of a President that does not want this control.  These are the actions of a President that wants, desires and designs to gather and maintain this control.

Mr. Obama speaks as though he was dropped into Washington from Illinois and has no knowledge of such things.   He seems to have forgotten he was a U.S. Senator.   He voted for and approved the actions over the past two years that have lead to this problem.   The budget deficits he “inherited” were the budgets he passed!!!  The TARP and stimulus he fully supported.

This IS HIS ECONOMY.  This is what he wants and the way in which he governs.  His actions show this.  Crisis shows the metal of a man (Biden say that?) and this man is crumbling.

Tracking the growth [...]]]> We all hear how big the national debt is. They even have Debt Tickers that attempt to show it. The National Debt is currently at 10Trillion dollars. But what of the yearly impact on this number. From 2005-2007 the Debt rose by just under 1.1Trillion dollars. Or about 550 billion a year.

Tracking the growth of the federal budget from 2001-2007. We can see that the budgets grew from 1.9Trillion in 2001 to 2.77 Trillion in 2007. Each year it grew between 5 and 10%. During that same time Revenues were 2.1Trillion in 2001 and grew to 2.7 trillion in 2007.

Looking at the year by year numbers a single year hold in expenditures and a traditional year in GDP growth would put the budget back in balance for the short term. So in a general sense the point is valid. In fact this is exactly how we were able to turn deficits into surpluses in the Clinton years. Under the last four years of the Clinton Administration the Federal budget grew 100 billion dollars and tax receipts grew 500 billion. In some of those years the budgets did not grow at all. All it takes is someone with enough discipline to put it in place.

Since tax revenues are limited by GDP (as my previous blog explains) then the only options available are really to cut taxes, get the economy moving and limit spending. Since we are tasked with an ever increasing requirement for Entitlement Spending we will likely have to cut other items to get back in line. By “Freezing” the federal budget in total or at least in overall scope for a single year we can get ourselves back in line.

Democrats make this plan sound extreme and completely impossible. Many companies and individuals around this country have had to mange without a raise (or worse a cut in pay) at least once in their lives. Do we not think that government employees and agencies can do the same thing for a year? I think they can, in fact I think it is time we all expect from them what they have always forced upon us. I believe that until the impacts and returns of this financial crisis aer known we should hold all spending at current levels. If we could have the discipline to do this every other year and maintain a 5% growth rate we could be in a far better place in 4-8 years. But if instead we are to add another trillion in spending and raise taxes, slow the economy and lose revenues we dig even further into this hole. The impacts of that are likely to limit any possible return from the bailout and compound the problem.

The choice is so clear. If it is not made this November it will be made in the congressional elections of 2010 and again in 2012 but the climb out will take just that much longer. I would like to start now.