Presidential candidates differing views on the economy

Without getting into every detail, the most important points to be taken from the debate is that Romney sees a dynamic economy that grows and contracts. An economy that as you lower taxes, jobs will be created and the economy will grow and revenue will increase more than if you raise taxes!

President Obama views the economy as static – he thinks that if one person earns more than another, that person had to take the money from one who doesn’t have it because the economy is finite. So, you must raise the taxes on the one who has it and give it to the one who does not, to level the playing field and make the economy “fair and balanced.”

Raising the taxes to increase spending (investment) causes small businesses to reduce hiring, the economy contracts, tax revenue actually decreases, borrowing begins and debt increases. So, the Obama progressives raise taxes again to fix that problem and the downward spiral has begun.

Also, as a business leader, Romney will come to a meeting with goals and objectives, not every detail of the plan, because that will be developed with experts, not political hacks, and he will sit down and discuss his objectives with those who agree and those who have other ideas, reach a consensus, implement a solution, measure the results and make corrections.

Obama, on the other hand uses the Chicago organizer method of persuasion – don’t explain your ideas with those of differing views, simply dictate healthcare to both sides and pass it late at night, preferably on the weekend. It’s the Chicago way or the highway.

During the debate, Obama discussed the economy by first blaming Bush and even though he boasted about creating five million jobs over the last 30 months, he omitted the first part of his term, which if included, lowers the jobs created during the last four years to less than 500,000.

Obama then quickly bypassed the lousy economy during his own term in office by saying, “The question here tonight is not where we’ve been, but where we’re going.” (Increasing spending by $5T more than revenue and increasing the national debt to $16T)

Romney then intervened, “I’m concerned that the path that we’re on has just been unsuccessful. The president has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years ago, that a bigger government, spending more, taxing more, regulating more, if you will, trickle-down government would work.”

Romney also pointed out that our government can not continue to borrow from future generations -forcing our own children and grandchildren to repay our debt to China.

Borrowing over $1.2T dollars every year of his presidency – defines Obama’s view of government economy!



  1. On a related note……

    Report: Obama.com solicits foreign contributions for prez

    The independently owned website Obama.com, which steers users to the president’s campaign donation website, gets most of its traffic from foreign countries, raising questions about the legality of tens of millions of small dollar donations to the campaign, according to a new report.

    The Government Accountability Institute today released details of an eight-month probe into fundraising by the presidential candidates and all House and Senate candidates that also shows that the president’s outreach and fundraising have targeted websites in Chinese, Arabic, Thai, and Korean. Generally, donations from foreign nations are illegal.

    Read more at: http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-obama.com-solicits-foreign-contributions-for-prez/article/2510096#.UHMfs1GByzE

  2. JRM_CommonSense

    It is always fun to watch someone rewrite the definitions of long held concepts like a dynamic approach to the economy and a static approach to the economy so that they fit their biased approach to their “reality”. Such intellectual dishonesty clearly identifies those who are unable to provide anything of value to the solution of today’s very difficult problems,m but want us top believe that they know what they are talking about. It is getting funnier and funnier.

  3. The national debt is getting bigger and bigger. While the kool-aid drinking fools laugh.


  4. JRM_CommonSense

    I guess that creating jobs by adding the production of 15 new ships a year to the defense budget is a good start. However, guess who has to pay for all those ships! Tell me that will not make the national debt bigger. Oh right, we are going to reduce spending. Now I feel better!

    • Ted Biondo

      At least the government is doing what the constitution requires for the national defense. Where did the founding fathers come up with welfare for your friends, JRM?

  5. JRM_CommonSense

    Well Ted, it is nice of you to assume that all my friends are on welfare. It just shows how warped your perception of reality is and that you can be as “snarky” as any other politician.

    I am also glad that you see that the cancellation of various defense programs that have occurred over the last few years are an example of the government “doing what the constitution requires for the nationaal defense”. I have to assume that is what you mean, because the 15 ships I was talking about are not being proposed by the government or asked for by the defense department.

    Some day you may also represent the difference between static and dynamic approaches to the economy in less dishonest terms and comparisons than you did in this posting. Even a 1st year economics major or a high school student in District 205 would have a better understanding of the difference than you tried to get us believe. You show even less knowledge about this topic than you do about demand and supply. But I guess that is par for the course for an engineer. Heavens knows I saw that demonstrated many, many times by the engineeers back at Sundstand in the 1980’s and 1990’s and early 2000’s.

  6. Obamas politics are not clear. He changes his stance like the wind. Even a deer could sniff him out. We need real energy now, and we have it. It will take another 20 years to develop solar and wind to be sustainable in this economy. We the People want to live today, feed the children, and also invest in tomorrow! This is a real sad economy when woman have to be the breadwinners and their husbands can not find meaningful work.

  7. JRM_CommonSense

    And yet Romney is now chiding the current administration because 3 million “more” women are living in poverty. Doesn’t sound like he is in step with your “We the People” position. Maybe you should go back and check when the height of the job loses were occurring. The highest month was January of 2009 when 800,000 jobs were lost. I am also sure that Mr. Romney has demonstrated that he “changes his stance like the wind”. A better comparison would be “changing his stance as often as he changes his underwear”. But then again, we see the entire political spectrum doing a fine job of rewriting history.

  8. You forget to mention that the Obama regime pays it’s FEMALE White House staffers 18% LESS than their male counterparts. And don’t forget to read this:

    Obama’s White House is a ‘hostile environment for females that treats women like meat’


    From USA Today:

    US unemployment aid applications jump to 388K

    Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2012/10/18/2289356/us-unemployment-aid-applications.html#storylink=cpy

    WASHINGTON – Weekly applications for U.S. unemployment benefits jumped 46,000 last week to a seasonally adjusted 388,000, the highest in four months. The increase marks a rebound from the previous week’s sharp drop.

    Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2012/10/18/2289356/us-unemployment-aid-applications.html#storylink=cpy

  9. AND…

    ‘Binder Derangement Syndrome’: How the Democratic Party Exploits Women

    One of the most fascinating examples of how the Democratic Party relies on reactionary, even fuddy-duddy, ideology to maintain power is their conception of the role of women in our society.

    The party and their media minions treat (or pretend to treat) women like an oppressed class when the female population in our colleges and graduate schools (notably law and medicine) has already outstripped or will soon outstrip the male in almost every area save engineering and science, and they are gaining in those. They are also invading the boardrooms and the political arena as never before.

    And this has been going on for some years. Soon enough, as more women matriculate, they will dominate many fields of endeavor in our country and salary inequalities that remain will vanish or be rationalized through maternity or childcare leave. It’s beyond anything the women’s movement ever conceived and is happening naturally.

    Extrapolating even slightly, our society seems headed for a quasi-matriarchy. Leaving aside whether this is good or bad — I don’t think it’s necessarily either — it’s a reality.

    But it’s a reality the Democratic Party is desperate to ignore, since the oppression of women — certainly true in the past and still obviously true in other cultures today — is their most important ideological pillar. In fact, they could not possibly win a major election without it. They would lose in a landslide even if they were still able to Balkanize the black and Latino votes.

    Hence constant appeals are made to the lowest common female denominator in an attempt to terrify single women and soccer moms, etc., that their “reproductive rights” are being violated or someone is about to deprive them of birth control pills or force-feed ultrasounds in their private parts.

    It’s absurd, if you think about it — but the Democrats don’t want you to. They just want women to feel deprived or manipulated.

    In truth, the last place government should be sticking its nose is an individual’s private life. Most Americans, in recent polling, are anti-abortion except in extreme cases (I am too), but most Americans want this kind of thing dealt with, as much as possible, away from the intruding hand of the state (ditto).

    Read more at: http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2012/10/18/binder-derangement-syndrome-how-the-democratic-party-exploits-women/

  10. JRM_CommonSense

    All one can do is laugh at the crap that this guy can find. What is even funnier is that he presents it as completely factual, and then challenges people to refute the “facts” that he has presented. The best thing about him is that he is consistent. You can count on the drap to flow and he never disappoints. After all, SNuss is an acronym.

  11. So, female White House staff aren’t underpaid, or treated like “meat”?

    Your blathering isn’t backed up with sources, my facts are.

    So, as Bugs Bunny would say, “What a maroon”!

  12. JRM_CommonSense

    You do not have facts. All you have presented is “he said, she said” crap presented in things called “controversial books” or by “conservative sources” that could not prove their points if they were forced to. As I said, your typical crap.

    Your blathering the same things that these “controversial sources” blather about doesn’t anoint them as fact. It just show the continual parade of crap you chase and present hoping that there are more “maroons” out there like you who will believe it. But. you are consistent and dogged. That, however, doe not make anything you present even close to facts. But keep at it. We all like to chuckle.

  13. Obviously James Carville had people like you in mind when he decided to be a Democrat. Mooooooo!

  14. JRM_CommonSense

    At least I am not going “Baaaaaaa” like you do or taking that SNussy approach of if you cannot keep up with logical discourse then you have to keep up with insults. Good approach! As useful as the flingin the crap and hoping it stick somewhere.

  15. JRM, if it wasn’t so entertaining to read your inane and delusional commentary, I might just ignore your rants completely.

  16. JRM_CommonSense

    That would be better than having to put up with the continuous “crap-a-link” postings that you are so good at. It’s like putting up with the “joke-of-the-day” and spamming maroons on e-mail and facebook. Only these “crap-a-links” can’t be deleted like the stuff the other maroons post.

  17. Look at who is using “scatological” comments now, hypocrite.
    BTW, if you want a “joke-of-the-day”, just watch “Plugs” Biden flap his lips.

  18. JRM_CommonSense

    No thanks on the Biden watching. Your “jokes-of-the-day” are much funnier than anything that duffus could come up with.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *