Monday, March 3, 2014

Who Needs Jobs Anyway?

Suppose I told you of an economic plan that would add $600 billion every year to the world economy, $200 billion of which would come directly into the US economy. In 10 year speak, that’s more than $2 trillion into the US economy... about 2.5 times the amount of the Obama stimulus, and this money would grow out of the economy rather than being borrowed so it could be pumped in. Sounds like something anyone would jump on, right? Yeah, good luck with that.

The agreement in question is the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” a sort of free trade agreement with Japan which would open up the service sector of both countries to free trade as well as doing some things for agriculture.

The Japanese want it. America wants it. Even Team Obama want it... probably because they need to start producing jobs unless he wants to be known as The Unemployment President. So why isn’t it happening?

Well, Obama has never made trade agreements a priority. In fact, like all the import parts of his job, they bore him. But now he’s working diligently (or at least his people are), and they’ve come up with several deals or potential deals. Several of these are estimated to be at least as valuable as the TTIP.

BUT there is a problem. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi (the new darling of the fringe... think about that for a moment), don’t want any stinkin’ trade agreements. And to keep that from happening, Reid has denied Obama “fast-track” authority to negotiate these deals. The fast-track authority lets the President submit these treaties to the Congress in a yes/no fashion with no amendments. Without that authority, no one will sign on the dotted line with us because they would be making all kinds of politically unpopular compromises only to have us say, “Gee, that’s great, now we need to run this through Congress and see what the retard from Arkansas wants to add.” Only a fool would negotiate with anyone who doesn’t have the authority to stand behind their promises.

So because of Harry Reid, several billion dollars that could be added to the economy are missing. Of course, this is nothing new. The Democrats have always been protectionist because their party is about protecting inefficiency rather than fixing it. Heck, with things like Obamacare they’ve even crossed over into the business of actively promoting inefficiency.


tryanmax said...

It's almost become a rule of thumb that you can spot the good ideas by what our government won't do.

Kit said...

Nancy Pelosi is the darling of the Fringe? When did that happen?

AndrewPrice said...

Guys, this published automatically. I'm not really back yet. I hope to be back in the next couple days though. I am feeling a lot better.

Also, the film site will have articles all week.

Anonymous said...

I have never believed that Obama is bored by the important parts of his job. Never. What I have believed since inauguration day 2009 and believe now is that he is a lazy and unqualified man who has never worked in his life and simply is unable to do the job. He went to Harvard but refuses to release his grades.What does that tell you? He was president of the Harvard Law Review and never published an article. He has had one job his entire life. Senator from Illinois. (I don't count community organizer as a job) As senator he voted "present" 53 times. A community organizer (that's an experience,not a job) schmoozes people and hits up the government for money through loans,grants,etc. A senator is never financially responsible for the cost of things he signs onto. Barack Obama has spent a lifetime living on someone else's tab. It's not that he's bored by the work of the Presidency. It's that he has no idea how to do it.
PS I realize you're not back yet but I wanted to get that off my chest.Take all the time you need and feel better.

BevfromNYC said...

Hey, Gypsy, Andrew may not be here, but the rest of us are! I agree that Obama has no experience and I will add that I think his major problem is that he has never heard the words "No, you are wrong". He is the true product of the "participation ribbon" mentality. "You are the best, the brightest, and smartest and if they don't give you [fill in the blank] then they are obviously [fill in the blank] and must be sued.
Heck, he self-describes himself as the "smartest person in the room". No one who actually IS the smartest person in the room would ever describe himself that way. The smartest person in the room is the one who knows he/she ISN'T the smartest person in the room. This person would surround him/herself with the people HE/SHE thought were smarter and listen to their counsel. Not yes men and sycophants. Nor do they make demands and throw temper tantrums and expect to followed "or else". That's what insecure celebrities do. Not true leaders or statesmen.

Anonymous said...

You're absolutely right Bev. He's had everything handed to him his whole life. You make a great point. He doesn't think of himself as a leader, he thinks of himself as a powerful celebrity. He recently made a remark about the republicans being 0 for two trying to beat me. Me. Always me. His signature piece of legislation is a joke. His party is in trouble and really worried about losing the Senate. Reid and Pelosi,who were absolutely critical in the passage of Obamacare, are turning on him. Senate candidates from his party are distancing themselves from him. His attempt to hijack the Sandyhook tragedy got kicked back in his teeth. And all he does is talk about himself, mug for photographers and take selfies at funerals. Try and think of any other US President behaving that way.(Well,except Clinton)
And you're right. Think of anybody with an intellect that you admire. Bill Buckley, David Horowitz. Charles Krauthamer. Have any of these guys ever described themselves as the smartest guy in the room?
Intelligent people read and speak and write. They aren't threatened by the accomplishments of others. An insecure narcicist has to keep making noise to cover his insecurity and drown out criticism that people might begin to notice.

BevfromNYC said...

Well, at least it's comforting to know that Russia and China are in agreement about the Ukraine...8-\ That is something that we were told might be a very bad thing in the 70's.

El Gordo said...

Gypsy, the narcissism and unfounded self-regard are one thing, but the ideological component cannot be discounted. Obama is hardcore left-wing. His choices are not random. He is not Chauncey the Gardner, alas.

This isn´t news to you, it has been said before and I´ll say it again. He MEANS to destroy American values and institutions. But he would argue that they are already meaningless and corrupted. I bet you he thinks his own extremism isn´t extreme, it is fully justified by the imagined extremism of his opponents going back to all the boogeymen the left created in the past fifty years. He wants to be the anti-Reagan but he also believes in the worst possible caricature of Reagan - the "dumb actor who fooled stupid Americans" meme - and that explains a lot about him.

The only enemies he believes in are domestic ... or American allies.

If Putin told him that America has no business interfering in the internal affairs of the New Soviet Union because it represents an imperialist, unjust system based on racism and exploitation, Obama would have nothing to reply. He would probably say something about the lines of "Yes, but we have come a long way. My presidency is proof of that. Of course, we still have work to do ... but hey, I get it, Vlad, right?"

That is how he thinks. I don´t know a lot but I have met enough lefties.

Anonymous said...

No argument here El Gordo.

Anthony said...

Yeah, I can't imagine the modern Democrats ever signing a trade agreement.

Obama may have decided that free trade could be useful to him right about now, but free trade is the sort of thing demagogues rail against. There must be wildly successful autarky out there that I'm unaware of.

BevfromNYC said...

Anthony - There's called Texas! ;-) [Okay, I admit it. I had to look up what "autarky" meant...]

Post a Comment