Is the World Economy Heading Into a 'Perfect Storm'?

With that doofus in office we are getting closer everyday.
Obama's Stimulus Tax Dollars Used to Create Jobs Overseas


by John Nolte 10 Jul 2012, 8:00 AM PDT
A few weeks ago, the Washington Post and the Obama campaign worked together to attack Governor Mitt Romney with proven lies about outsourcing. Though this attack has been exposed as a lie, that didn't stop Barack Obama from continuing the attack, nor has it stopped his Media Palace Guards from attempting to drag Romney into the trap of responding to these lies.

Rather than make Obama pay a price for lying -- which the media would do to a Republican -- the media chose instead to try to pressure Romney into the no-win debate of attempting to prove a negative, which would've only hurt him more than the lies themselves. Polls now prove Romney made the correct decision.

Another superb decision the Romney campaign made was to take their time, get some facts together, and fight back against Obama's and the Washington Post's lies on offense.

It seems as though our current President, who is now posing as Mr. In-Sourcer-in-Chief, not only squandered nearly a trillion of our dollars on a failed stimulus, but also used our money to create jobs in foreign countries such as France, Italy, Russia, Mexico, and so on and on and on.

RNC Chair Reince Priebus:

What do Finnish cars, Mexican solar panels, and Danish windmills have in common? They were all funded by your tax dollars.

Thanks to President Obama, taxpayer money, mostly in the form of stimulus funds, ended up in the hands of companies overseas. Instead of creating jobs in America, the stimulus and other Obama policies created jobs or sent money to Finland, New Zealand, Indonesia, India, Mexico, Germany, Australia, Switzerland, China, Denmark, South Korea, the Dominican Republic, Thailand, Vietnam, Italy, Russia, Luxembourg, El Salvador, Great Britain, Spain, Japan, and France.

How did this happen? Consider the example of Fisker Automotive. The company received $500 million in loan guarantees from the U.S. government to produce electric cars. Then they took their money and decided to produce their $100,000 electric sports cars in Finland.

President Obama's policies may be spurring job creation in Scandinavia. But here at home, twenty-three million Americans are struggling for work. Millions of middle class families can barely make ends meet.

The billions of dollars that went overseas largely had to be borrowed. In other words, President Obama borrowed money from countries like China to send money to... countries like China. It's that kind of reckless spending that led President Obama to rack up $5.6 trillion in debt over the last three and a half years, bringing our total national debt to $15.8 trillion.

Priebus will officially unveil all of this later today in the swing state of Iowa, and a website called "Obamanomics Outsourced" goes into great detail showing how your tax dollars and mine benefitted and created jobs in over a dozen countries not named America.

What we all know, of course, is that the very same media currently obsessed with outsourcing will never give the damning fact that Obama used our tax dollars to create jobs overseas the attention it deserves for one simple reason: it is a damning fact.

Not only does it prove the hypocrisy of President In-Sourcer, it goes straight to the heart of his failed stimulus and overall economy.

Good for the Romney campaign, though. They refused to get dragged into a media-created lie and a debate they couldn’t win -- refused to be put on defense -- and now have facts to fight the fire of the media's and Obama's lies.

Because the Romney case is so strong in their counter-attack, my guess is that both Obama and his Media Palace Guards will suddenly find outsourcing a less interesting topic.

Which is still a win for our side.

No offense, but you just "moved the goal posts." Your original post focused on "the middle and upper class" supporting the "lower class" and "generous benefits to government employees" and now you're talking about funneling dollars from the middle class to CEOs and the banks. Two VERY different issues. I might also point out that ridiculous CEO salaries and golden parchutes are only part of the problem.

The primary issue is the current tax structure which makes unbridled greed worth the effort. Consider that Between 1950 and 1980, the real income (in other words adjusted for inflation) that marked the top of the lowest income quintile rose by 99.5%, the 2nd quintile by 95.4%, the 3rd quintile by 107.9% and the 4th quintile by 109.9%. At the tippy top of the income scale, the minimum income to be in the top 5% rose by 103.4%.

In other words, everybody was doing pretty darn good.

Now let’s look at 1980 to 2008. The real income that marked the top of the lowest income quintile rose by 7.4% (no, that’s not a typo, I really meant 7.4%), the 2nd quintile by 13.2%, the 3rd quintile by 21.6% and the 4th quintile by 30.8%. At the tippy top of the income scale, the minimum income to be in the top 5% rose by 46.2%.

The numbers are so anemic because the 2000s have been a complete dud. Real income actually went down for all of the groups. For the lowest income quintile income went down by 7.4% (no, that’s not a typo, I really meant 7.4% again), the 2nd quintile by 3.4%, the 3rd quintile by 2.2% and the 4th quintile by 0.9%. Even the tippy top of the income scale felt the blahs slightly, the minimum income to be in the top 5% went down by 0.1%. Notice however that the higher up you are, the less the negative impact.

Do you see the problem here?

A small percentage of the population cannot continue to absorb an overwhelming share of the wealth being produced without eventually leading to a serious problem. Think French Revolution. We're far from that at the moment, but not as far as we used to be and that's the real issue.