Posts Tagged ‘45%’

Obamanomics Has Been Terrible For Poor – But The Rich Have Done GREAT Under His Despicable Policies

June 3, 2013

And I heard a voice from among the four living beings say, “A loaf of wheat bread or three loaves of barley will cost a day’s pay. And don’t waste the olive oil and wine.” — Revelation 6:6

According to Democrats, it is the Republicans who only care about the rich.  And of course it is Republican policies that are disastrous for the poor and the middle class.

Of course, Democrats are liars without shame, without honor, without integrity and without decency.  So you can pretty much roundfile their bullcrap.  The facts prove the exact OPPOSITE.

What you find is that, after five years of Obama, we’ve gained less than half the wealth that was lost since 2007 (after Democrats blew up the economy and demagogued their sabotage).  And what you find is of that 45% of wealth that was regained (let’s just forget the 55% of the wealth that Obama lost for America), fully two-thirds of it was recouped by the stock market.  And what you find is that 80% of the stock market is owned by one-percenters.

Obama and his godawful Obamanomics crushed the poor into tiny bits of meat and spoon-fed that meat to über-rich like George Soros and Warren Buffet.

Average U.S. household has regained just 45% of wealth lost during recession, St. Louis Fed analysis finds
The Associated Press
Published: 31 May 2013 01:22 AM
Updated: 31 May 2013 01:22 AM

WASHINGTON — American households have rebuilt less than half of the wealth lost during the recession, leaving them without the spending power to fuel a robust economic recovery, according to a new analysis from the Federal Reserve.

From the peak of the boom to the bottom of the bust, households watched $16 trillion in wealth disappear amid sinking stock prices and the rubble of the real estate market. Since then, Americans have been able to recapture only 45 percent of that amount on average, after adjusting for inflation and population growth, according to the St. Louis Fed report, released Thursday.

A separate Federal Reserve report in March calculated that Americans as a whole had regained 91 percent of their losses.

Household wealth plunged $16 trillion from the third quarter of 2007 through the first quarter of 2009. By the final three months of 2012, American households as a group had regained $14.7 trillion.

Yet once those figures are adjusted for inflation and averaged across the U.S. population, the picture doesn’t look so bright: The average household has recovered only 45 percent of its wealth, the St. Louis Fed concluded. That suggests that consumer spending could remain modest as many Americans try to rebuild their wealth by saving more and paying off debts.

The number of U.S. households grew by 3.8 million to 115 million from the third quarter of 2007 through the final three months of last year, the report said.

As a result, the rebound in wealth has been spread across more people, reducing the average for each household.

In addition, though inflation has averaged just 2 percent over the past five years, it has eroded some of the purchasing power of Americans’ regained wealth.

The report showed most of the improvement was due to stock market gains, which primarily benefit wealthy families. That means the recovery for other households has been even weaker

“A conclusion that the financial damage of the crisis and recession largely has been repaired is not justified,” the report stated.

Fragile households

The study is part of a growing body of research on the role of household wealth — or its lack — in amplifying the impact of the recession and slowing the recovery. Traditionally, economists and policymakers have focused on the effects of employment and income. But the report from the St. Louis Fed argued that swings in household balance sheets — which include home values, stock prices, savings and debt — were critical in determining which families weathered the financial storm and which got swept away.

The report found that the most fragile households were less educated, relatively young, black or Hispanic, or some combination of those characteristics. Those families tended to have low savings combined with high debt and accrued much of their wealth through housing.

How those households respond to the changes in wealth is a critical component of the recovery. Top officials, including Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, have pointed to the rebound in real estate and the soaring stock market as evidence of the success of the central bank’s policies.

The Fed is spending $85 billion a month to lower long-term interest rates and stimulate the economy. It has also kept short-term interest rates near zero. That has helped push stock markets to record highs, while home prices have jumped by the most in seven years. Consumer confidence is at its highest point since February 2008. Officials hope those factors will eventually result in more consumer spending power.

“I think we’re at an inflection point,” said Beth Ann Bovino, senior economist at Standard & Poor’s. “We’re seeing things turn around. And that’s where the optimism comes in among households.”

The fear factor

But research by noted economists Karl Case, John Quigley and Robert Shiller found the households were more powerfully affected by declines in wealth than increases.

An unexpected 1 percent drop in housing prices caused a permanent 0.1 percent decrease in spending, that study found.

But a similar 1 percent rise in housing prices boosted consumer spending by only 0.03 percent.

“Rising wealth is gratifying, but the loss of wealth is terrifying,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moodys.com. “Households spend somewhat more freely as their nest eggs grow, but they slash their spending when their nest eggs shrink.”

William Emmons, chief economist at the St. Louis Fed’s new Center for Household Financial Stability, said that many of the most vulnerable households began to treat credit as another form of income during the boom. After the bust, they were forced to dramatically rethink their finances, resulting in more cautious spending.

Emmons said many families have not experienced any recovery — or are even still losing wealth. Young Americans, those with few skills or the unemployed may not have been able to rebuild any wealth.

Emmons noted that although the number of foreclosures has dropped significantly, it is still more than double the pre-crisis amount.

Meanwhile, he estimated that recent gains in the stock market mean the recovery of wealth is nearly complete for white and Asian households and older Americans.

Wealth accumulation affects not only families’ current financial status but also their prospects. The St. Louis Fed report points to studies that connect savings to the likelihood of attending and completing college and to economic mobility.

The average household had a net worth of $539,500 at the end of last year, according to a separate paper the St. Louis Fed released Thursday. That was up from $469,900 in the first quarter of 2009 but sharply below the peak of $641,000 in the first quarter of 2007.

The Washington Post, The Associated Press

The overwhelming evidence of history reveals that every single time America has suffered a serious recession, it has exploded out of it at a rate that equaled the descent into said recession.  The difference now is that Barack Obama has been undermining and outright destroying the American economy and the entire American way of life.

Economically, Obama has been THE WORST PRESIDENT EVER.

And so what has happened?  Obama has actually INCREASED the gulf between the rich and the poor, increased the gulf between blacks and whites and basically has made life harder and more difficult with fewer opportunities for all the very groups of people that Obama falsely promised he cared about and would help.

Democrats are dishonest.  They are liars.  They say one thing and then they do the exact opposite time and time again.  They don’t give a flying DAMN about the poor or the middle class; they want more government power.  They want to be able to decide – I’ll use the word “dictate” – who wins and who loses, who gets rewarded and who gets punished, who gets taxed and who gets exemptions, who gets a free ride and who pays out the wazoo, and even who lives and who dies as the same biased Obama IRS that targeted and punished conservative political and religious groups will begin doing the same thing as they sharpen their knives to cut into their role in the ObamaCare holocaust.

You can’t borrow and spend your way out of bankruptcy.  You just can’t.  You can’t keep printing money when you’re broke and never find yourself standing on the cliff that just fell away leaving you standing with your feet firmly planted in midair.  You just can’t.  You can’t allow the Democrats to keep parasitically taxing the producers to redistribute wealth to the slackers in exchange for their vote and not see a radical decline in America.  You just can’t.

Friday will be an interesting day.  That is the day that the job numbers come out for the month of May.  Here’s what’s funny: if we have a good report and hear that the job market is opening up, the stock market will plunge.  Why?  Because the rich people who populate the stock market want to keep sucking on the Obama tit of endless Federal Reserve “stimulus” via quantitative easing, QE1, QE2, QE3, Operation Twist and now QE Forever.  The Fed has indicated that if the economy is performing better that they will begin to look to get out of the massive purchase of American debt (where we literally create more money by adding zeroes to the Fed computers).  That candy is ONLY available to the rich, and the poor be damned as their small fixed incomes become worth less and less as the mega-poor interest rates creates severe devaluation of the dollars they are desperately trying to save.  As for the big businesses and the mega-rich who invest in those businesses, they want to continue receiving Obama’s “stimulus” in the form of super-low interest loans (that none of the rest of us can ever hope to get) that will allow them to keep making more and more and more money.

It’s right out of the economy that the Book of Revelation talks about.  And it’s OBAMA’s economy.

Advertisements

Why Won’t Obama Invite The Doctors Who Will Resign If His Health Agenda Passes?

October 12, 2009

Michelle Malkin had the best title for the propaganda event that saw white-coated doctors milling around on the White House lawn: “Spin Doctors for Obamacare.”  She said:

Creators Syndicate – Lights, camera, agitprop! The curtains opened on yet another artfully staged performance of Obamacare Theater this week. One hundred and fifty doctors took their places on the plush lawn outside the West Wing — many acting like “Twilight” groupies with cameras instead of credible medical professionals. The president approved the scenery: “I am thrilled to have all of you here today, and you look very spiffy in your coats.”

White House wardrobe assistants guaranteed the “spiffy.” As the New York Post’s Charles Hurt reported, the physicians “were told to bring their white lab coats to make sure that TV cameras captured the image.”  President Obama’s aides hastily handed out costumes to those who came in suits or dresses before the doc-and-pony show began.

But while Halloween came early to the Potomac, these partisan single-payer activists in White House-supplied clothing aren’t fooling anyone.

Obama’s spin doctors belong to a group called Doctors for America (DFA), which reportedly supplied the white lab coats.  The White House event was organized in conjunction with DFA and Organizing for America, Obama’s campaign outfit.

OFA and DFA are behind a massive new Obamacare ad campaign, letter-writing campaign and doctor-recruitment campaign. The supposedly “grassroots” nonprofit DFA is a spin-off of Doctors for Obama, a 2008 campaign arm that aggressively pushed the Democrats’ government health care takeover. DFA claims to have thousands of members with a “variety of backgrounds.” But there’s little diversity in their views on socialized medicine (98 percent want a taxpayer-funded public insurance option) — or in their political contributions.

And she went on to document what a bunch of political hacks the “Doctors for Obama” and various “spin doctor” groups mentioned above had been for Obama and the Democrats.

Gateway Pundit revealed the typical Obama White House hypocrisy of this event:

What the media won’t tell you is that the doctors were former members of the “Doctors for Obama” organization.

150 doctors including supporters from Doctors for America, the former Doctors for Obama organization, assembled on the White House lawn today for a Astroturfed show with the president.

The operational word is “Astroturf.”  As angry as the Democrats have been about “Astroturfing,” they sure have done a lot of it.  We’ve had the children of high level Obama supporters planted to ask planted questions at Astroturf health care town halls to go with the busloads of union thugs being sent even across state lines to attend town halls.  We’ve had Astroturf former Obama delegates fraudulently pretending to be doctors at town hall events.  And now we have real, but still Astroturf doctors being brought in for Astroturf photo-ops – complete with Astroturf white coats.

The truly dishonest thing was when Barack Obama deceitfully misrepresented these doctors to claim that they somehow represented the medical mainstream.  Obama said:

“When you cut through all the noise and all the distractions that are out there, I think what’s most telling is that some of the people who are most supportive of reform are the very medical professionals who know the health-care system best,” the president said.

But when you actually realize what is happening, you find that this scripted – and even costumed – White House event is an all too typical example of the “noise” and “distractions” coming from the very guy who is complaining about the “noise and distractions.”

My question to Obama is, “WHAT ABOUT THESE FOLKS?

45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul

By TERRY JONES, INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY Posted 09/15/2009
Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.

The poll contradicts the claims of not only the White House, but also doctors’ own lobby — the powerful American Medical Association — both of which suggest the medical profession is behind the proposed overhaul.

It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration’s claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.

The IBD/TIPP Poll was conducted by mail the past two weeks, with 1,376 practicing physicians chosen randomly throughout the country taking part. Responses are still coming in, and doctors’ positions on related topics — including the impact of an overhaul on senior care, medical school applications and drug development — will be covered later in this series.

Major findings included:

Two-thirds, or 65%, of doctors say they oppose the proposed government expansion plan. This contradicts the administration’s claims that doctors are part of an “unprecedented coalition” supporting a medical overhaul.

It also differs with findings of a poll released Monday by National Public Radio that suggests a “majority of physicians want public and private insurance options,” and clashes with media reports such as Tuesday’s front-page story in the Los Angeles Times with the headline “Doctors Go For Obama’s Reform.”

Nowhere in the Times story does it say doctors as a whole back the overhaul. It says only that the AMA — the “association representing the nation’s physicians” and what “many still regard as the country’s premier lobbying force” — is “lobbying and advertising to win public support for President Obama’s sweeping plan.”

The AMA, in fact, represents approximately 18% of physicians and has been hit with a number of defections by members opposed to the AMA’s support of Democrats’ proposed health care overhaul.

Four of nine doctors, or 45%, said they “would consider leaving their practice or taking an early retirement” if Congress passes the plan the Democratic majority and White House have in mind.

More than 800,000 doctors were practicing in 2006, the government says. Projecting the poll’s finding onto that population, 360,000 doctors would consider quitting.

More than seven in 10 doctors, or 71% — the most lopsided response in the poll — answered “no” when asked if they believed “the government can cover 47 million more people and that it will cost less money and the quality of care will be better.”

This response is consistent with critics who complain that the administration and congressional Democrats have yet to explain how, even with the current number of physicians and nurses, they can cover more people and lower the cost at the same time.

The only way, the critics contend, is by rationing care — giving it to some and denying it to others. That cuts against another claim by plan supporters — that care would be better.

IBD/TIPP’s finding that many doctors could leave the business suggests that such rationing could be more severe than even critics believe.  Rationing is one of the drawbacks associated with government plans in countries such as Canada and the U.K. Stories about growing waiting lists for badly needed care, horror stories of care gone wrong, babies born on sidewalks, and even people dying as a result of care delayed or denied are rife.

In this country, the number of doctors is already lagging population growth.

From 2003 to 2006, the number of active physicians in the U.S. grew by just 0.8% a year, adding a total of 25,700 doctors.

Recent population growth has been 1% a year. Patients, in short, are already being added faster than physicians, creating a medical bottleneck.

The great concern is that, with increased mandates, lower pay and less freedom to practice, doctors could abandon medicine in droves, as the IBD/TIPP Poll suggests. Under the proposed medical overhaul, an additional 47 million people would have to be cared for — an 18% increase in patient loads, without an equivalent increase in doctors. The actual effect could be somewhat less because a significant share of the uninsured already get care.

Even so, the government vows to cut hundreds of billions of dollars from health care spending to pay for reform, which would encourage a flight from the profession.

The U.S. today has just 2.4 physicians per 1,000 population — below the median of 3.1 for members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the official club of wealthy nations.

Adding millions of patients to physicians’ caseloads would threaten to overwhelm the system. Medical gatekeepers would have to deny care to large numbers of people. That means care would have to be rationed.

“It’s like giving everyone free bus passes, but there are only two buses,” Dr. Ted Epperly, president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, told the Associated Press. [Link added].

Hope for a surge in new doctors may be misplaced. A recent study from the Association of American Medical Colleges found steadily declining enrollment in medical schools since 1980.

The study found that, just with current patient demand, the U.S. will have 159,000 fewer doctors than it needs by 2025. Unless corrected, that would make some sort of medical rationing or long waiting lists almost mandatory.

[Snip]

Other states with government-run or mandated health insurance systems, including Maine, Tennessee and Hawaii, have been forced to cut back services and coverage.

This experience has been repeated in other countries where a form of nationalized care is common. In particular, many nationalized health systems seem to have trouble finding enough doctors to meet demand.

In Britain, a lack of practicing physicians means the country has had to import thousands of foreign doctors to care for patients in the National Health Service.

“A third of (British) primary care trusts are flying in (general practitioners) from as far away as Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Hungary, Italy and Switzerland” because of a doctor shortage, a recent story in the British Daily Mail noted.

British doctors, demoralized by long hours and burdensome rules, simply refuse to see patients at nights and weekends.

Likewise, Canadian physicians who have to deal with the stringent rules and income limits imposed by that country’s national health plan have emigrated in droves to other countries, including the U.S.

ObamaCare is all about rationing.

Doctors will begin retiring in droves because government-funded healthcare already has them operating at a loss.  On average, Medicare only pays 93% of the COST of providing care.  Doctors and hospitals subsidize Medicare patients at a loss by counting on private insurance-covered patients to allow them to operate at an overall profit.  If you expand government-covered patients, and reduce the role of private insurance, medical practice will simply become unprofitable.  Hence the mass retirements as physicians stop swimming against the tide of government red-tape and low-balling and just quit.

Why doesn’t Obama invite these doctors to the White House.  They can even give them white coats when they get there, to look more “doctorly” like they did with the pro-ObamaCare doctors.

If Obama had the best interests for the nation in his heart, he would want to hear from these doctors.  Instead, he’s doing everything in his power to shut such professionals out of the debate while he tries to ram his ideological and partisan agenda through.

ObamaCare will cost this country hundreds of billions – and over time trillions – of dollars at a time when we can least afford it, even as its imposition results in thousands of doctors choosing to retire at a time when we can least afford it.