Showing posts with label Economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economy. Show all posts
Sunday, August 05, 2012
That's a bold strategy, Cotton: Obama campaign appears to have spotted Mitt Romney the state of Indiana
David "Red Diaper Baby" Axelrod hardest hit:
Aside from Rasmussen, I don't trust any of these polls that show Obama leading Romney.
My suspicion is that we will see the return of "The Bradley Effect" come November, as the most racially divisive president and attorney general in history are pink-slipped.
Hat tip: BadBlue.
Four years ago, President Obama became the first Democrat since 1964 to win Indiana. He looks unlikely to repeat that feat.
A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in the state finds challenger Mitt Romney picking up 51% of the vote while the president earns just 35%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate, and 11% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
The Indiana survey of 400 Likely Voters was conducted July 31-August 1, 2012 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.
Aside from Rasmussen, I don't trust any of these polls that show Obama leading Romney.
My suspicion is that we will see the return of "The Bradley Effect" come November, as the most racially divisive president and attorney general in history are pink-slipped.
Hat tip: BadBlue.
Saturday, August 04, 2012
David Plouffe: Obama has "Clear momentum" on the economy
Obama adviser David Fluff says "The president and Democrats in Congress move into the August recess with clear momentum on the question of who to trust on taxes."
Indeed they do.
Hat tip: JWR.
Indeed they do.
Hat tip: JWR.
Who knew? The Hill's Amie Parnes says that rising unemployment numbers help Obama!
Someone named "Amie Parnes", if that is his/her/its real name, posted an inadvertently comic article at The Hill entitled "As jobs picture improves, so do Obama reelection chances."
The latest jobs numbers, however, were a disaster.
Not only did the "official" unemployment number (or U-3) jump up a notch to 8.3 percent, but the real picture is far more dire. Mike Shedlock explains.
That's not all: James Pethokoukis relays a chart from the St. Louis Federal Reserve (above) that highlights the awesome failure of the Obama-Democrats: the economy needs to create 11 million jobs to return the country to Bush administration numbers.
And, as real journalists know, the true U-3 unemployment rate is in double digits.
Forward!
As for Blaming Bush: it never gets old for President SCOAMF. Every time he does it, he's simply telling us he doesn't know what the hell he's doing.
But you already knew that.
The latest jobs numbers, however, were a disaster.
Not only did the "official" unemployment number (or U-3) jump up a notch to 8.3 percent, but the real picture is far more dire. Mike Shedlock explains.
This month, those "not" in the labor force increased by 348,000 to 88,340,000, another record high. If you are not in the labor force, you are not counted as unemployed... In the last year, those "not" in the labor force rose by 2,027,000...
Over the past several years people have dropped out of the labor force at an astounding, almost unbelievable rate, holding the unemployment rate artificially low...
Given the complete distortions of reality with respect to not counting people who allegedly dropped out of the work force, it is easy to misrepresent the headline numbers.
Digging under the surface, the drop in the unemployment rate over the past two years is nothing but a statistical mirage. Things are much worse than the reported numbers indicate.
That's not all: James Pethokoukis relays a chart from the St. Louis Federal Reserve (above) that highlights the awesome failure of the Obama-Democrats: the economy needs to create 11 million jobs to return the country to Bush administration numbers.
And, as real journalists know, the true U-3 unemployment rate is in double digits.
Once again, a bad jobs report comes out, and both the White House and the media trumpet it as "good" news and a sign the economy's turning around. It is in fact a dismal jobs report, as the numbers clearly show.
On the surface, the headline numbers don't look so bad. The Labor Department reported that U.S. businesses created 163,000 net new payroll jobs in July, while the unemployment rate was "essentially unchanged" at 8.3%.
No sooner had the numbers come out than President Obama was standing at a podium before the cameras, claiming credit for the job growth and again blaming former President Bush for the bad state of the economy.
"This morning we learned that our businesses created 172,000 new jobs in the month of July," he said... But "we" haven't in fact created any jobs. As a matter of fact, since Obama has entered office, some 1.1 million payroll jobs have disappeared.
This year, businesses have created 151,000 new jobs a month on average — way below the 300,000-plus per month job creation in a typical recovery-expansion.
If that still sounds good, understand this: Just to keep up with the natural rate of growth in the workforce, the economy has to create about 130,000 new jobs a month. So at this rate, it'll take us four years and four months just to get back to the number of jobs we had in 2007.
Sound like progress to you?
Forward!
As for Blaming Bush: it never gets old for President SCOAMF. Every time he does it, he's simply telling us he doesn't know what the hell he's doing.
But you already knew that.
Obamanomics: Ryan Lochte's parents face foreclosure in Florida
And if the Dissociative Press says it, it must be true:
As most folks who live in the real world know, the American economy remains in the Obama Depression.
The parents of U.S. Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte are facing foreclosure in Florida.
According to a lawsuit filed in May in Volusia County, CitiMortgage is suing to foreclose on Steven and Ileana Lochte. The bank is seeking to recoup $250,000. The news was first reported by TMZ.
Court records show that Ileana Lochte asked the court to dismiss the case last month. Messages left Saturday for her attorney were not immediately returned.
The Lochtes divorced last year. Court records did not show whether Steven Lochte had an attorney. Both parents have been in London recently to watch their son compete.
Ryan Lochte has won five medals, including two gold medals, in swimming events at the London Olympics.
As most folks who live in the real world know, the American economy remains in the Obama Depression.
Great News: ex-World Bank Official Says United States Debt Has Finally Achieved "Death Spiral" Status
Although he didn't mention the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" by name:
The cracks in our society are appearing more and more frequently.
Three large cities in California declared bankruptcy in the last two weeks alone.
The Washington Post reports that Congress won't have money for the U.S. transportation system within two years. Trenton, New Jersey laid off a third of its police force. Colorado Springs removed a third of its streetlights, trashcans, and bus routes.
The entire gambit is called "The Cloward-Piven Strategy"... and it's anything but a conspiracy theory.
Hat tip: Cold Fury.
Richard Duncan, formerly of the World Bank and chief economist at Blackhorse Asset Mgmt., says America's $16 trillion federal debt has escalated into a "death spiral, "as he told CNBC.
And it could result in a depression so severe that he doesn't "think our civilization could survive it."
And Duncan is not alone in warning that the U.S. economy may go into a "death spiral."
Since the recession, noted economists including Laurence Kotlikoff, a former member of President Reagan's Council of Economic Advisers, have come to similar conclusions... Kotlikoff estimates the true fiscal gap is $211 trillion when unfunded entitlements like Social Security and Medicare are included.
However, while the debt crisis numbers are well known to most Americans, the economy hasn't suffered a major correction for almost 4 years.
The cracks in our society are appearing more and more frequently.
Three large cities in California declared bankruptcy in the last two weeks alone.
The Washington Post reports that Congress won't have money for the U.S. transportation system within two years. Trenton, New Jersey laid off a third of its police force. Colorado Springs removed a third of its streetlights, trashcans, and bus routes.
The entire gambit is called "The Cloward-Piven Strategy"... and it's anything but a conspiracy theory.
Hat tip: Cold Fury.
Friday, August 03, 2012
Don't Cry For Me, America
In the early 20th century, Argentina was one of the richest countries in the world. While Great Britain's maritime power and its far-flung empire had propelled it to a dominant position among the world's industrialized nations, only the United States challenged Argentina for the position of the world's second-most powerful economy.
It was blessed with abundant agriculture, vast swaths of rich farmland laced with navigable rivers and an accessible port system. Its level of industrialization was higher than many European countries: railroads, automobiles and telephones were commonplace.
In 1916, a new president was elected. Hipólito Irigoyen had formed a party called The Radicals under the banner of "fundamental change" with an appeal to the middle class.
Among Irigoyen's changes: mandatory pension insurance, mandatory health insurance, and support for low-income housing construction to stimulate the economy. Put simply, the state assumed economic control of a vast swath of the country's operations and began assessing new payroll taxes to fund its efforts.
With an increasing flow of funds into these entitlement programs, the government's payouts soon became overly generous. Before long its outlays surpassed the value of the taxpayers' contributions. Put simply, it quickly became under-funded, much like the United States' Social Security and Medicare programs.
The death knell for the Argentine economy, however, came with the election of Juan Perón. Perón had a fascist and corporatist upbringing; he and his charismatic wife aimed their populist rhetoric at the nation's rich.
This targeted group "swiftly expanded to cover most of the propertied middle classes, who became an enemy to be defeated and humiliated."
Under Perón, the size of government bureaucracies exploded through massive programs of social spending and by encouraging the growth of labor unions.
High taxes and economic mismanagement took their inevitable toll even after Perón had been driven from office. But his populist rhetoric and "contempt for economic realities" lived on. Argentina's federal government continued to spend far beyond its means.
Hyperinflation exploded in 1989, the final stage of a process characterized by "industrial protectionism, redistribution of income based on increased wages, and growing state intervention in the economy..."
The Argentinian government's practice of printing money to pay off its public debts had crushed the economy. Inflation hit 3000%, reminiscent of the Weimar Republic. Food riots were rampant; stores were looted; the country descended into chaos.
And by 1994, Argentina's public pensions -- the equivalent of Social Security -- had imploded. The payroll tax had increased from 5% to 26%, but it wasn't enough. In addition, Argentina had implemented a value-added tax (VAT), new income taxes, a personal tax on wealth, and additional revenues based upon the sale of public enterprises. These crushed the private sector, further damaging the economy.
A government-controlled "privatization" effort to rescue seniors' pensions was attempted. But, by 2001, those funds had also been raided by the government, the monies replaced by Argentina's defaulted government bonds.
By 2002, "...government fiscal irresponsibility... induced a national economic crisis as severe as America's Great Depression."
In 1902 Argentina was one of the world's richest countries. Little more than a hundred years later, it is poverty-stricken, struggling to meet its debt obligations in the midst of droughts and economic malaise.
We've seen this movie before. The Democrats' populist plans -- their inane class warfare arguments -- can't possibly work, because government bankrupts everything it touches. History teaches us that ObamaCare and unfunded entitlement programs will be utter and complete disasters.Today's Democrats are guilty of more than stupidity; they are enslaving future generations to poverty and misery. And they will be long gone when it all implodes. They will be as cold and dead as Juan Perón when the piper must ultimately be paid.
November is the last chance we may have to save this precious country.
References: A tear for Argentina's pension funds; Inflation in Argentina; The United States of Argentina.
Wednesday, August 01, 2012
When is wearing a $990 shirt evidence of being "out of touch", but sporting a $6,800 jacket is deserving of praise?
It's a trick question. When you're a member of vintage media, of course!
Gee, WaPo hacks: last time I checked, the Romneys actually made their money working in the private sector, as opposed to living on the public dole.
Pray tell, Michelle's everyday wardrobe includes $1,000 handbags, $150 T-shirts and $540 sneakers (not to mention her "priceless" gowns, dresses, and other outfits).
Maybe one of you enterprising pro journalists could total up Michelle's wardrobe budget and ask a few questions about it. Or would that be too much work?
Back in May, Ann Romney, wife of Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney, wore a $990 Reed Krakoff silk shirt for a media appearance. The item of clothing set off a media firestorm, with the Romneys widely accused of being “out of touch” with average Americans.
In particular, the Washington Post wrote that the $990 blouse “will not help her husband change those perceptions, no matter how many Laundromat photo ops are on the campaign’s itinerary.”
Fast forward to last Friday, when First Lady Michelle Obama attended an Olympics reception for heads of state at Buckingham Palace, donning a J. Mendel cap sleeve jacket from the 2013 Resort collection.
The price-tag? $6,800.
This time, the Washington Post simply described the intricacies of the jacket and noted that Mrs. Obama has previously been criticized for “not dressing up enough for Queen Elizabeth II, so she stepped up her game.” No snide remarks, no outrage over the cost, no suggestion she was “out of touch.”
Gee, WaPo hacks: last time I checked, the Romneys actually made their money working in the private sector, as opposed to living on the public dole.
Pray tell, Michelle's everyday wardrobe includes $1,000 handbags, $150 T-shirts and $540 sneakers (not to mention her "priceless" gowns, dresses, and other outfits).
Maybe one of you enterprising pro journalists could total up Michelle's wardrobe budget and ask a few questions about it. Or would that be too much work?
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Auto industry pundits: GM's results will be horrible due to unsellable electric cars and global cooling, but mostly unsellable electric cars
You think GM's stock price is at an all-time low now? Dude.
And all this time I thought the central planners in Washington could outperfrom the free market, what with their genius ideas like Chevy Volts that cost $250,000 apiece to produce.
Hat tip: LVN.
It’s not that people are leaving GM. It’s how they leave. Two weeks ago, Opel chief Karl-Friedrich Stracke presented numbers to Dan Akerson. Akerson fires him. Opel gets two interim chiefs in a week. Last Thursday, Opel’s new design chief Dave Lyon doesn’t even start his job. Today, media in the U.S. and Germany report that Lyon had been escorted from the building and to a waiting car by GM’s head of personnel. A day later, global marketing chief Joel Ewanick suddenly leaves. Instead of wishing him all the best for his future endeavors, GM spokesman Greg Martin puts a knife in Ewanick’s back: “He failed to meet the expectations the company has of an employee.”
It took them two years to come to that uncivilized conclusion? Ewanick was hired as U.S. marketing chief in May 2010. Apparently, he exceeded expectations, because half a year later, Ewanick was promoted to global chief marketing officer. The leaked reasons for Ewanick’s ouster. Facebook and soccer, don’t ring true. In a normal company, when a marketing chief decides not to put ads on Facebook and to ditch football for soccer, a Facebook and football loving CEO simply would call the marketing chief and ask whether he’s serious. The same day, there would be a comment that the marketing chief was misquoted, in a normal company.
It all looks like Dan Akerson is panicking. The GM stock is at an all-time low. GM is losing market share. When July numbers will be announced this week, GM won’t look so good, industry oracles say.
And all this time I thought the central planners in Washington could outperfrom the free market, what with their genius ideas like Chevy Volts that cost $250,000 apiece to produce.
Hat tip: LVN.
Saturday, July 28, 2012
"We tried our plan... and it worked!" -- Record 1 in 6 Americans on foodstamps or disability
Historic is one word I'd use to describe this administration, as more than 55 million Americans are now on foodstamps or disability:
So it turns out President Obama's recent statement -- "We tried our plan... and it worked!" -- was entirely accurate. That is, if his plan was the Cloward-Piven-inspired destruction of American capitalism.
America's transition into a welfare state continues, as May saw a new all time high number of American households, 22.3 million to be exact, enter technical poverty and collect foodstamps...
...At the individual level, 46.5 million Americans lived off foodstamps, a 222,157 increase in the month, or nearly three times the number of people who found jobs in June according to the BLS. Next month this too will be a record, as it is currently just 17,367 before the previous all time high set in December of 2011...
...The good news, and we use the term loosely, is that the average benefit per household rose from all time lows of $275.82 to $276.76. Surely, the bottom is in and just like housing, there is on blue skies ahead...
Combined foodstamp and disability recipients: 55,250,723.
So it turns out President Obama's recent statement -- "We tried our plan... and it worked!" -- was entirely accurate. That is, if his plan was the Cloward-Piven-inspired destruction of American capitalism.
Friday, July 27, 2012
How Low Can It Go? Don't Ask.
I refer, of course, to the economy. Or, rather, what's left of it:
A GDP rate less than 2 percent is basically nothing. For comparison purposes, the Reagan recovery -- after the height of the Carter recession -- saw GDP growth rates over 7 (seven) percent.
By the way, can I introduce you to my date for Cotillion?
GDP Report Worst In Over Year
Friday's Q2 GDP report will offer the most comprehensive picture of how quickly economic conditions have deteriorated, just days ahead of the Federal Reserve's next policy meeting.
Economists were predicting a second-quarter pace above 2% annualized a few months ago, but the consensus is now 1.2%. That would be the weakest in more than a year and down from 1.9% in Q1 and nearly 3% in Q4 2011.
A GDP rate less than 2 percent is basically nothing. For comparison purposes, the Reagan recovery -- after the height of the Carter recession -- saw GDP growth rates over 7 (seven) percent.
By the way, can I introduce you to my date for Cotillion?
Thursday, July 26, 2012
HOLY CRAP: Jon Corzine's "MF Global", which disappeared $1.6 billion in client funds, represented by Eric Holder's law firm
Just when you think the most lawless attorney general in U.S. history has hit bottom, Eric Holder breaks out a jackhammer and starts digging through the foundation.
The only jobs Obama appears to be creating are roles for special prosecutors.
It's always enlightening to look back on the Republicans who supported Holder -- over the warnings voiced by conservatives who had actually researched his egregious track record. Thanks to Michelle Malkin, their names will be etched in history and include:
They deserve the ridicule, the blame and the shame they've brought upon themselves and this country.
Eric Holder is a disgrace. In a just, lawful society, he would have been impeached long ago.
Those wondering why the Department of Justice has refused to go after Jon Corzine for the vaporization of $1.6 billion in MF Global client funds need look no further than the documents uncovered by the Government Accountability Institute that reveal that the now-defunct MF Global was a client of Attorney General Eric Holder and Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer’s former law firm, Covington & Burling.
...Records also reveal that MF Global’s trustee for the Chapter 11 bankruptcy retained as its general bankruptcy counsel Morrison & Foerester--the very law firm from which Associate Attorney General Tony West came to DOJ...
...Until now, the conventional wisdom for why Holder wouldn’t throw the book at Corzine was that Corzine is an Obama campaign bundler. Indeed, as Breitbart News reported, four of the top officials at the Department of Justice--Eric Holder, Thomas Perrelli, Karol Mason, and Tony West--were also big money bundlers for Obama...
...At least 65 members of Congress have already signed a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder requesting that he appoint a special prosecutor to investigate MF Global’s collapse and the loss of $1.6 billion in customer money...
...What’s more, even progressives have begun to wonder whether Holder’s Covington & Burling connection explains why the Department of Justice has not charged, prosecuted, or jailed a single Wall Street executive after the biggest financial collapse in American history...
...More and more Washington insiders are asking a question that was considered off-limits in the nation's capital just a few months ago: Who, exactly, is Attorney General Eric Holder representing? As scandal after scandal erupts on Wall Street, involving everything from global lending manipulation to cocaine and prostitution, more and more people are worrying about Holder's seeming inaction -- or worse -- in the face of mounting evidence.
The only jobs Obama appears to be creating are roles for special prosecutors.
It's always enlightening to look back on the Republicans who supported Holder -- over the warnings voiced by conservatives who had actually researched his egregious track record. Thanks to Michelle Malkin, their names will be etched in history and include:
...Susan Collins, R-Maine, Bob Corker, R-Tenn., Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, ... Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., ... John McCain, R-Ariz., Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, ... Olympia Snowe, R-Maine
They deserve the ridicule, the blame and the shame they've brought upon themselves and this country.
Eric Holder is a disgrace. In a just, lawful society, he would have been impeached long ago.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
My advice to GM retirees: take the lump sum and run! Run like the wind!
General Motors, because of its White House-inspired abrogation of bankruptcy law, never really fixed its various contract problems with the unions. Its costs remain too high to be truly competitive and it has bound itself to the federal government -- in classic, crony-capitalistic style -- to produce useless electric paperweights like the Chevy Volt.
The result is as you might expect. GM's stock price continues to slide while its accounting skulduggery escalates to paper over the shortfalls.
In related news, GM is also trying to deal with its exorbitant pensions which hang over it like a dark cloud. Many of GM's former employees have extremely rich pensions that remain in-force: GM is now offering to buy them out with a lump sum payment or promise them a steady monthly income stream instead.
Based on the economic realities confronting a company that never really fixed the endemic problems that led to its bankruptcy, I think I'd choose the former.
Because more government bailouts ain't in the cards for GM.
The result is as you might expect. GM's stock price continues to slide while its accounting skulduggery escalates to paper over the shortfalls.
Of all curious correlations we could find to demonstrate the collapse in GM stock, which opened for trade back in November 2010 at $35, and just hit an all time post-IPO low at just over half its IPO price, the best one that exemplifies the second great collapse of GM is the amount of dealer inventory, aka channel stuffing, shown on an inverted axis: the lower the price of GM, the more the channel stuffing.
Of course, nobody could have possibly predicted that.
In related news, GM is also trying to deal with its exorbitant pensions which hang over it like a dark cloud. Many of GM's former employees have extremely rich pensions that remain in-force: GM is now offering to buy them out with a lump sum payment or promise them a steady monthly income stream instead.
For weeks, John and Kathy Matthews have agonized over the choice: accept $818,000 in a lump sum from General Motors to buy out Mr. Matthews’s pension or keep collecting a check of $4,854 a month...
...Although G.M. won’t put it quite so directly, by Mr. Matthews’s math, the company predicted that he would live for another 21 years and used that estimate to come up with the $818,000 offer.
Based on the economic realities confronting a company that never really fixed the endemic problems that led to its bankruptcy, I think I'd choose the former.
Because more government bailouts ain't in the cards for GM.
Embarrassingly juxtamaposed headlines o' the day
Spotted on BadBlue.
Hey Axelrod: the wheels are coming off right in front of us. Not only is this administration a joke -- you're a joke.
• Geithner: "Economy Is Not Growing Fast Enough. Unemployment Is Very High."
• Obama on the economy: ‘We tried our plan — and it worked’
Hey Axelrod: the wheels are coming off right in front of us. Not only is this administration a joke -- you're a joke.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Holy Shnikeys: New York Times reports Obamacare will lead to massive increase in number of uninsured
And if The New York Times-Democrat says it, it must be true:
Let me predict the spin that liberals will use on their latest debacle. I'm going with "unforeseen circumstances". That seems to get bandied about whenever the central planners' schemes go awry.
The Congressional Budget Office said Tuesday that the Supreme Court decision on President Obama’s health care overhaul would probably lead to an increase in the number of uninsured and a modest reduction in the cost to the federal government...
...As a result, the budget office said, it now predicts that six million fewer people will be insured by Medicaid, the federal-state program for low-income people. But half of them, it said, will probably gain private insurance coverage through health insurance exchanges to be established in all states.
On balance, the budget office said in a new report, “about 3 million more people will be uninsured'’ in 2022.
Let me predict the spin that liberals will use on their latest debacle. I'm going with "unforeseen circumstances". That seems to get bandied about whenever the central planners' schemes go awry.
Zero percent snark
Caution: this is not a snarky post. It contains precisely zero-percent snark. I want to connect a few dots for you. Additional caution: you may want to sit down.
1 Headline: Record number in government anti-poverty programs
In February 2009 Robert Rector, quoted in the London Sunday Times, predicted that the Obama Democrats' expansion of welfare, food stamps and unemployment would be disastrous.
This is the program Obama gutted in 2009 and continued to gut last week. In other words, the Obama administration continues to intentionally expand the welfare state far beyond anything ever seen on Earth. But wait! There's more!
* * * * * * * * *
2 Increasing welfare and food stamps leads to more kids born to unwed mothers
The statistical link between the availability of welfare and out-of-wedlock births is conclusive. There have been dozens of studies that link the availability of welfare benefits to out-of-wedlock births.
One study found that a 50 percent increase in the value of AFDC and foodstamp payments led to a 43 percent increase in the number of out-of-wedlock births.
A 1996 paper describes the correlation in ominous terms.
In other words, if you ratchet up welfare benefits, you get reduced employment and more single-parent families.
Now, why am I telling you this?
* * * * * * * * *
3 Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates
In 1995, Dr. Patrick Fagan wrote a seminal summary of the situation: "Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers... High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers... The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers...
Of 23 peer-reviewed U.S. studies since 2000, 20 found that family structure directly affects crime and/or delinquency.
"[R]esearch strongly suggests both that young adults and teens raised in single-parent homes are more likely to commit crimes, and that communities with high rates of family fragmentation (especially unwed childbearing) suffer higher crime rates as a result."
For example, a 23-year study found that nearly 90% of the change in violent crime rates can be attributed to the change in percentages of out-of-wedlock births (divorce rates, on the other hand, had no relationship with crime).
In The Atlantic Monthly, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead noted that the "relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation's mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime."
Let me repeat the most important statement -- "controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime."
An increase in the percentage of children raised in single-parent households leads to increased levels of crime; and there are no significant differences between blacks, whites, or any other race when it comes to this simple fact.
* * * * * * * * *
4 Recap: An enormous crime wave is coming
• Fact: There are a record number of Americans dependent upon government anti-poverty programs thanks to the Obama Democrats
• Fact: Expanded access to welfare and food stamps greatly increases the number of children born to unwed mothers
• Fact: Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates
• Inescapable Conclusion: with the unprecedented increase in welfare, food stamps and unemployment, we will also see an unparalleled increase in violent crime within the next dozen or so years.
Obama and his Democrat sycophants in Congress will have created millions of single-parent families. These kids, born out-of-wedlock, will find themselves trapped in lives of criminality at far higher rates than kids from two-parent families.
Fast forward a dozen years, give or take a couple, and we will see a true Obama Crime Wave. I predict that we will see an unprecedented increase in crime. In fact, you could call it historic.
And the question is not whether it will happen. The question is just how bad it will be.
1 Headline: Record number in government anti-poverty programs
n the 1970’s, a difficult economic time under Jimmy Carter with his “misery index,” 1 in 50 Americans was on food stamps. Today that number is 1 in 7. Just since 2008 the number of people in food stamp programs has doubled -- and the Democrats spin this as one of their great accomplishments.
...I would never have thought that any politician could be proud of the fact that now 45 million Americans (and many illegals) are dependent on the government with the monthly SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program).
What was intended to be a temporary “safety net” for people who fell on hard times has become for many a way of life. Our safety net has become a safety hammock...
...Virtually unreported by the media, Obama gutted welfare reform when he signed an order saying welfare recipients would get paid and no longer have to be actively looking for work...
In February 2009 Robert Rector, quoted in the London Sunday Times, predicted that the Obama Democrats' expansion of welfare, food stamps and unemployment would be disastrous.
One of the few undisputed triumphs of American government of the past 20 years – the sweeping welfare reform programme that sent millions of dole claimants back to work – has been plunged into jeopardy by billions of dollars in state handouts included in the president’s controversial economic stimulus package...
...Robert Rector, a prominent welfare researcher who was one of the architects of Clinton's 1996 reform bill, warned last week that Obama’s stimulus plan was a “welfare spendathon” that would amount to the largest one-year increase in government handouts in American history... Despite dire warnings that reduced benefits for single mothers and deadlines on entitlement would create a social calamity – one liberal senator warned at the time that children would be “sleeping on grates” – the 1996 reforms cut welfare rolls from more than 5m families in 1995 to below 2m a decade later without a discernible increase in hardship.
This is the program Obama gutted in 2009 and continued to gut last week. In other words, the Obama administration continues to intentionally expand the welfare state far beyond anything ever seen on Earth. But wait! There's more!
2 Increasing welfare and food stamps leads to more kids born to unwed mothers
The statistical link between the availability of welfare and out-of-wedlock births is conclusive. There have been dozens of studies that link the availability of welfare benefits to out-of-wedlock births.
One study found that a 50 percent increase in the value of AFDC and foodstamp payments led to a 43 percent increase in the number of out-of-wedlock births.A 1996 paper describes the correlation in ominous terms.
...Out-of-wedlock births are strongly related to welfare dependency. A 1 percent increase in the welfare dependent population in a state increases the number of births to single mothers by about 0.5 percent...
...Welfare dependency reduces employment. A 1 percent increase in the dependent population increases the number who are not employed by about 0.1 percent... An increase in welfare benefits reduces employment by increasing the number of welfare dependents. An increase in AFDC benefits by 1 percent of average income increases the number who are not employed by about 0.5.
In other words, if you ratchet up welfare benefits, you get reduced employment and more single-parent families.
Now, why am I telling you this?
3 Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates
In 1995, Dr. Patrick Fagan wrote a seminal summary of the situation: "Over the past thirty years, the rise in violent crime parallels the rise in families abandoned by fathers... High-crime neighborhoods are characterized by high concentrations of families abandoned by fathers... The rate of violent teenage crime corresponds with the number of families abandoned by fathers...
"Neighborhoods with a high degree of religious practice are not high-crime neighborhoods... Even in high-crime inner-city neighborhoods, well over 90 percent of children from safe, stable homes do not become delinquents. By contrast only 10 percent of children from unsafe, unstable homes in these neighborhoods avoid crime... Criminals capable of sustaining marriage gradually move away from a life of crime after they get married."
Of 23 peer-reviewed U.S. studies since 2000, 20 found that family structure directly affects crime and/or delinquency.
"[R]esearch strongly suggests both that young adults and teens raised in single-parent homes are more likely to commit crimes, and that communities with high rates of family fragmentation (especially unwed childbearing) suffer higher crime rates as a result."For example, a 23-year study found that nearly 90% of the change in violent crime rates can be attributed to the change in percentages of out-of-wedlock births (divorce rates, on the other hand, had no relationship with crime).
In The Atlantic Monthly, Barbara Dafoe Whitehead noted that the "relationship [between single-parent families and crime] is so strong that controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime. This conclusion shows up time and again in the literature. The nation's mayors, as well as police officers, social workers, probation officers, and court officials, consistently point to family break up as the most important source of rising rates of crime."Let me repeat the most important statement -- "controlling for family configuration erases the relationship between race and crime and between low income and crime."
An increase in the percentage of children raised in single-parent households leads to increased levels of crime; and there are no significant differences between blacks, whites, or any other race when it comes to this simple fact.
4 Recap: An enormous crime wave is coming
• Fact: There are a record number of Americans dependent upon government anti-poverty programs thanks to the Obama Democrats
• Fact: Expanded access to welfare and food stamps greatly increases the number of children born to unwed mothers
• Fact: Single-parent families correlate to higher crime rates
• Inescapable Conclusion: with the unprecedented increase in welfare, food stamps and unemployment, we will also see an unparalleled increase in violent crime within the next dozen or so years.
Obama and his Democrat sycophants in Congress will have created millions of single-parent families. These kids, born out-of-wedlock, will find themselves trapped in lives of criminality at far higher rates than kids from two-parent families.
Fast forward a dozen years, give or take a couple, and we will see a true Obama Crime Wave. I predict that we will see an unprecedented increase in crime. In fact, you could call it historic.
And the question is not whether it will happen. The question is just how bad it will be.
Monday, July 23, 2012
Romney: Uhm, dude. It's WE who PAY for government.
I don't know who this Romney fellow is, but based on his off-the-cuff quote on the Kudlow show (seemingly stated without teleprompters), I like the cut of his jib.
I like it.
LARRY KUDLOW: “Why do you think President Obama, what did he mean, if you've got a business, you didn't build it, someone else made that happen?
He claims it's being taken out of context. What do you think it means? Do you think this is Obama anti-business, anti-entrepreneur? Or do you think maybe he has been treated unfairly?”
GOV. ROMNEY: “Well, just read the whole speech. I found the speech even more disconcerting than just that particular line. The context is worse than the quote. The context, he says, you know, you think you've been successful because you're smart, but he says a lot of people are smart. You think you've been successful because you work hard, a lot of people work hard.
This is an ideology which says hey, we're all the same here, we ought to take from all and give to one another and that achievement, individual initiative and risk-taking and success are not to be rewarded as they have in the past. It's a very strange and in some respects foreign to the American experience type of philosophy. We have always been a nation that has celebrated success of various kinds. The kid that gets the honor roll, the individual worker that gets a promotion, the person that gets a better job. And in fact, the person that builds a business. And by the way, if you have a business and you started it, you did build it. And you deserve credit for that. It was not built for you by government. And by the way, we pay for government. Government doesn't come free. The people who begin enterprises, the people who work in enterprises, they're the ones paying for government.
So his whole philosophy is an upside-down philosophy that does not comport with the American experience. And if we want to get people working again--and that's my priority--if we want to get people working again, we have to celebrate success and achievement and not demonize it and denigrate the people who have worked hard, who are smart, who have made the kinds of investments to build a brighter future.”
I like it.
Exclusive photo: President signs huge endorsement deal!
At least, Uncle Ben claims this is an exclusive.
Consider: the federal government only runs 126 separate anti-poverty programs. And I'm sure there's no fraud, waste or duplication of effort whatsoever.
Consider: the federal government only runs 126 separate anti-poverty programs. And I'm sure there's no fraud, waste or duplication of effort whatsoever.
Change: Brooklyn couple snags $108K in welfare payments to accompany their three BMWs and a Lexus
Consider this yet another example of the welfare state run amok. There's no accountability on the part of big government. There's no real concern. Because it's not their money. Its yours.
Of course, this is precisely what you'd expect from a giant, unaccountable leviathan staffed with faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats who can't be fired.
The USDA has admitted it has no idea what people are actually buying with food stamps.
According to Medicare itself, 10 percent of its outlays -- roughly $48 billion -- are fraudulent. And that's only the chunk they admit.
And these are the geniuses who are going to take over the rest of the health care system if this monstrosity isn't repealed.
Does the term "death spiral" ring a bell?
Brooklyn Couple Pockets $108K In Welfare Coin. They Also Own Three BMWs And A Lexus
Rivka Baror, 51, and her husband Avraham Baror, 64, have been living pretty high on the hog -- aside from owning not one but three BMWs, the couple also owns a Lexus, a comfortable two-bedroom home in Brooklyn, and drops a lot of cash at places like Victoria's Secret and Home Depot. Oh, yeah -- they also collect a welfare check and have bilked taxpayers out of more than $100,000 in government assistance money over the last six years.
Between January 2006, and June 30 of this year, the Voice has learned that the Barors have collected a total of $108,715.57 in Medicaid and food stamp benefits.
In 2006, the Barors filed welfare applications under their given names. They claimed they had minimal income and no assets, which qualified them for a reasonable amount of government assistance. Simultaneously, the couple used the names "Avraham Bachbuth" and "Rivka Yedidia" to obtain bank accounts and buy property, cars, and pricey vacations... In fact, the home the couple claimed they rented at 1349 East 2nd Street in Brooklyn for a scant $1,100 a month is owned by "Avraham Bachbuth."
The couple also allegedly used the aliases to open several bank accounts, into which there were monthly cash deposits of $4,400. Additionally, the couple kept safe deposit boxes at two different banks, one of which contained more than $72,000 in cash... Additionally, according to DMV records obtained during an investigation by the Human Resources Administration, the Barors own three BMWs -- model years 2006, 2007, and 2008 -- and a 2007 Lexus.
Of course, this is precisely what you'd expect from a giant, unaccountable leviathan staffed with faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats who can't be fired.
The USDA has admitted it has no idea what people are actually buying with food stamps.
According to Medicare itself, 10 percent of its outlays -- roughly $48 billion -- are fraudulent. And that's only the chunk they admit.
And these are the geniuses who are going to take over the rest of the health care system if this monstrosity isn't repealed.
Does the term "death spiral" ring a bell?
Protest Photo o' the Day: Florida Greets the President
From The Tatler (via Diary of Daedalus):
Jim Powell asks "You didn't build that? Mr. Obama, you can't be serious."
Unfortunately for us, Jim, he is.
Jim Powell asks "You didn't build that? Mr. Obama, you can't be serious."
Unfortunately for us, Jim, he is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

























