by Gary C. Gibson

Created on: March 25, 2009   Last Updated: May 21, 2009

President Obama's budget plans 21 trillion dollars of public debt after he leaves office after a second term-is that rational planning or economic defeatism? Should the U.S. public become indentured servants of the future for globalists with concentrated wealth eager to develop the second and third world markets for their profits? What about the United States? Shouldn't America have fewer than a quarter million immigrants annually and an ecologically sustainable economy on a national basis with an improving environmental quality? Shouldn't every citizen have a good job and freedom from federal and corporate invasive personal 'bills of attainder' of either intellectual or financial capital?

The craziness of the Democrats with money may have started with the Bill Clinton administration. President Bill just wasn't tight enough in disciplining Wall Street and bankers. The the Bush II administration got in office and the known budget busting spender President could not help but run up world record setting deficits.

Ronald Reagan's acutely reasoned phenomenal mega Keynesian supply siding economic approach was o.k. in a limited way. No one ever mentions that J.M. Keynes did not advocate permanent large federal deficits for economic health. It was to be a brief, phenomenal deficit to pump prime an economy rather than a perennial one.

The J.P. Morgan bankers in 1994 that invented derivatives fundamentally created a way to support banking irresponsibility in lending. President Clinton loosening regulations on mortgages and banks were keeping as little as 1/40th their deposits with the rest lent out as seniorage to mint new money in effect. The entire banking system was a kind of ponzi scheme that collapsed in 2008 and 2009. Bankers and federal policy would eventually reallocate debt including 'toxic' debt to foreign nations such as China that purchased U.S. securities (bonds). The U.S. Government bought up the bad bank debt as the Wall Street world must have known they would. While President Obama has rightly increased fuel efficiency requirements for U.S. automobiles lately. He has not switched over to an ecological economic policy and national self-interest approaches remotely as far as he ought if the global non-realists of economic responsibility are to be driven back a little from their hegemonistic grasp on Washington D.C.'s economic policy.

Without a rational renewable ecological economic policy the administration is pump-priming the perfidy of the global

• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next Page >>