Author Topic: Obama was warned by his economic advisors not to pursue his campaign promises.  (Read 638 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama Was Warned By His Economic Team That His Campaign Promises Would Create A Mountain Of Debt

Michael Brendan Dougherty | Jan. 23, 2012, 8:57 AM | 780 | 17



Ryan Lizza reports for the New Yorker that on December 15 2008, a few short weeks before his inauguration, president-elect Obama was presented with a 57-page memo on the depth of the economic crisis drafted by Lawrence Summers and other economic advisors.

The memo informed the president that if he enacted his campaign promises in the current environment, he would shoot a gigantic hole into the nation's budget.

“Since January 2007 the medium-term budget deficit has deteriorated by about $250 billion annually,” the memo said. “If your campaign promises were enacted then, based on accurate scoring, the deficit would rise by another $100 billion annually. The consequence would be the largest run-up in the debt since World War II.”

Lizza's reporting also mentions the huge divide between Peter Orzsag, the budget director who suggested the president scale back his agenda, lest he run up historic deficits, and Christina Romer, the incoming chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers who wanted to suggest stimulus plans as large as the $2 trillion hole in the economy.

But Summers argued against a stimulus that was too large.

He offered the President four illustrative stimulus plans: $550 billion, $665 billion, $810 billion, and $890 billion. Obama was never offered the option of a stimulus package commensurate with the size of the hole in the economy––known by economists as the “output gap”––which was estimated at two trillion dollars during 2009 and 2010.

Summers advised the President that a larger stimulus could actually make things worse. “An excessive recovery package could spook markets or the public and be counterproductive,” he wrote, and added that none of his recommendations “returns the unemployment rate to its normal, pre-recession level. To accomplish a more significant reduction in the output gap would require stimulus of well over $1 trillion based on purely mechanical assumptions—which would likely not accomplish the goal because of the impact it would have on markets.”

Summers specifically warned that there could be a surprised public reaction to the massive spending and new govenrment, debt.

“This could come as a considerable sticker shock to the American public and the American political system, potentially reducing your ability to pass your agenda and undermining economic confidence at a critical time.”


The full 57-page memo will be made public by the New Yorker later today.



Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-was-warned-by-his-economic-team-that-his-campaign-promises-would-create-a-mountain-of-debt-2012-1#ixzz1kIJUfXAz








The idiot should have listened. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Eleven Stunning Revelations From Larry Summers’s Secret Economics Memo To Barack Obama
AEI blog ^ | 1-23-2012 | James Pethokoukis




Eleven Stunning Revelations From Larry Summers’s Secret Economics Memo To Barack Obama

By James Pethokoukis
January 23, 2012, 3:08 pm

A lengthy piece in The New Yorker looks at policymaking in the Obama White House. A key source for writer Ryan Lizza is a 57-page, “Sensitive & Confidential” memo written by economist Larry Summers—eventually to be head of Obama’s National Economic Council—to Obama in December 2008. Here’s some of what I learned about Team Obama’s thinking as the financial crisis was exploding, followed by quotes from the memo itself:

1. The stimulus was about implementing the Obama agenda

The short-run economic imperative was to identify as many campaign promises or high priority items that would spend out quickly and be inherently temporary. … The stimulus package is a key tool for advancing clean energy goals and fulfilling a number of campaign commitments.

2. Team Obama knows these deficits are dangerous (although it has offered no long-term plan to deal with them).


Closing the gap between what the campaign proposed and the estimates of the campaign offsets would require scaling back proposals by about $100 billion annually or adding new offsets totaling the same. Even this, however, would leave an average deficit over the next decade that would be worse than any post-World War II decade. This would be entirely unsustainable and could cause serious economic problems in the both the short run and the long run.

3. Obamanomics was pricier than advertised.


Your campaign proposals add about $100 billion per year to the deficit largely because rescoring indicates that some of your revenue raisers do not raise as much as the campaign assumed and some of your proposals cost more than the campaign assumed. … Treasury estimates that repealing the tax cuts above $250,000 would raise about $40 billion less than the campaign assumed. … The health plan is about $10 billion more costly than the campaign estimated and the health savings are about $25 billion lower than the campaign estimated.

4. Even Washington can only spend so much money so fast.


Constructing a package of this size, or even in the $500 billion range, is a major challenge. While the most effective stimulus is government investment, it is difficult to identify feasible spending projects on the scale that is needed to stabilize the macroeconomy. Moreover, there is a tension between the need to spend the money quickly and the desire to spend the money wisely. To get the package to the requisite size, and also to address other problems, we recommend combining it with substantial state fiscal relief and tax cuts for individuals and businesses.

5. Liberals can complain about the stimulus having too many tax cuts, but even Team Obama thought more spending was unrealistic.


As noted above, it is not possible to spend out much more than $225 billion in the next two years with high-priority investments and protections for the most vulnerable. This total, however, falls well short of what economists believe is needed for the economy, both in total and especially in 2009. As a result, to achieve our macroeconomic objectives—minimally the 2.5 million job goal—will require other sources of stimulus including state fiscal relief, tax cuts for individuals, or tax cuts for businesses.

6. Team Obama wanted to use courts to force massive mortgage principal writedowns.


The next step in the housing plan is responsible bankruptcy reform along the lines of the Durbin bill you cosponsored. This would allow bankruptcy courts to write down the principal of primary residences to the current market value. We recommend announcing this reform to begin immediately following the close of the enhanced Hope for Homeowners period.

7. Team Obama thought a stimulus plan of more than $1 trillion would spook financial markets and send interest rates climbing.


To accomplish a more significant reduction in the output gap would require stimulus of well over $1 trillion based on purely mechanical assumptions—which would likely not accomplish the goal because of the impact it would have on markets.

8. Greg Mankiw, economic adviser to Mitt Romney, was dubious about the stimulus.


Greg Mankiw is the only economist we have consulted with who refused to name a number and was generally skeptical about stimulus.

9. But the Fed was a stimulus enabler.


Senior Federal Reserve officials appear to be of the view that a plan that well exceeds $600 billion would be desirable.

10. IPAB was there at the very beginning.


There are two possibilities for making tough decisions on the long-run budget, which could be done either separately or together: creating an executive-branch “health board” (which focuses on one part of the issue) and a Congressionally chartered commission (which could focus more broadly).

11. The financial crisis wasn’t just Wall Street’s fault.


A significant cause of the current crisis lies in the failure of regulators to exercise vigorously the authority they already have.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
 :).  Bump.  So can we all now admit that obama put his agenda before the needs of the nation?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
:).  Bump.  So can we all now admit that obama put his agenda before the needs of the nation?

can't answer.  doing my laundry.  who else is going to do it?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
can't answer.  doing my laundry.  who else is going to do it?

see, what mittens should have done was have garbage bags w the Obama symbol on them and say he was taking out the trash. 


BBBOOOMMM

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
hahahha that woudl have been awesome!!!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
hahahha that woudl have been awesome!!!

 Think mittens needs a strong dose of a brash, non pc, loud, in your face Bronx Ginzo Wop to teach him street tactics. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
mittens needs to just sip daquiris on the beach, give up the pursuit of power, and just enjoy life.


newt is an angry tortured soul who is never satisfied (like myself lol).... he'd make good change as president, and be a crazy MFer at that.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
mittens needs to just sip daquiris on the beach, give up the pursuit of power, and just enjoy life.


newt is an angry tortured soul who is never satisfied (like myself lol).... he'd make good change as president, and be a crazy MFer at that.


newt and RP are good tonight. 



Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
The idiot should have listened. 
HUH? What'chu talkin' 'bout Willis? He didn't go though with MOST of his campaign promises...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
HUH? What'chu talkin' 'bout Willis? He didn't go though with MOST of his campaign promises...


He went through with the ones HE wanted to, which was skyrocketing energy prices. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39450
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/340286c8-4615-11e1-9592-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1kP00la7R


Unreal!   Obama basically did whatever the fuck he wanted, got that CVNT pelosi to get her leftist fellow communists to go along with this, same w reid. 


Dont you obamabots get it yet!!!!   He is TRYING to destroy the nation. 

Coach is Back!

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 59656
  • It’s All Bullshit
.


howardroark

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2524
  • Resident Objectivist & Autodidact

4. Even Washington can only spend so much money so fast.


Constructing a package of this size, or even in the $500 billion range, is a major challenge. While the most effective stimulus is government investment, it is difficult to identify feasible spending projects on the scale that is needed to stabilize the macroeconomy. Moreover, there is a tension between the need to spend the money quickly and the desire to spend the money wisely. To get the package to the requisite size, and also to address other problems, we recommend combining it with substantial state fiscal relief and tax cuts for individuals and businesses.

Good point. The tax cuts in the stimulus package were weak though. The most powerful tax cut they could  have enacted would have been the elimination of the employer's share of the payroll tax for a year. Though it would have blown a hole in the budget to the tune of $400bn, it would have done a lot to encourage hiring, especially of unskilled and low skilled workers where unemployment is the highest. It's also the only tax cut that doesn't need to be in place for long periods of time in order to exert a substantial positive economic effect.

What's interesting is that even Keynes acknowledged toward the end of his life that cutting the employer's share of payroll taxes was the best way to stimulate employment. http://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/2009/02/06/keynes-supported-payroll-tax-reductions/