William Black Exposes Obama's Supporting Economists listed on WH WEB PAGE!

[KoKo]

The Effort to Claim That Economists Support Obama's Capitulation on Tax Cuts for the Wealthy

William K. Black, 12.10.2010

Assoc. Professor, Univ. of Missouri, Kansas City; Sr. regulator during S&L debacle

You know the Obama administration is desperate when it creates a web page citing economists who support its capitulation on taxes. And what do you know, these economists are all "wealth managers" or from major banks. This shows that Obama is continuing to promote the views of his virulent opponents, who gloried in and profited from the Democrats' recent electoral and legislative defeats.

The web page cites the support of five economists. Peter Cardillo, the Bank of America, Greg Mankiw, and Wells Fargo (are the second through fifth economists on Obama's list). Who are these supporters and why is the administration proud of their support? Cardillo is an economist for an investment firm, Avalon Partners. Avalon's web site states that it specializes in "wealth management" for "affluent investors...to meet the unique needs of high net worth individuals...." Yes, the wealthiest one-hundredth of one percent of Americans -- the truly, uniquely needy.

The administration's web site gives pride of placement to Avalon Partners' support of Obama's decision to support the extension of Bush's dramatic reduction in the taxes its ultra-wealthy clients will pay. That tax reduction will make Cardillo and his senior colleagues at Avalon Partners, themselves among the wealthiest Americans. Obama's capitulation on tax breaks for the richest one percent of Americans is worth tens of thousands of dollars personally to Cardillo and hundreds of millions of dollars to Avalon's clients. Mr. Cardillo does not support Obama's capitulation -- he rejoices in it.

Indeed, he has said in a recent interview that the reduction in taxes for the elites has helped fuel a "Santa Claus" rally in stocks. Obama played St. Nick for the wealthiest of Americans to the tune of tens of billions of dollars. The reasons that Cardillo supports the bill are obvious. The mystery is why Obama fails to realize that his support demonstrates why Obama's capitulation is so harmful to the nation. At a time when income inequality has reached record levels in modern America and crippled our democracy Obama has given in to bullies who made increased inequality their central goal.

Obama claims that he capitulated to the Republicans on taxes for the wealthiest in order to reduce unemployment. Here's what Cardillo said about Obama and unemployment just before the midterm elections:

"As far as corporate America hiring again it's basically dependent on what happens in Washington," says Peter Cardillo, chief economist at Avalon Partners in New York. "If the opposition party should gain enough seats to perhaps reverse the present administration's policies somewhat, then I think you'll see a big pickup in employment."

Obama has promoted the views of one of his most virulent opponents, who gloried in and profited from his and the Democrats' recent electoral and legislative defeats. Simultaneously, Obama launched another petulant attack on his strongest supporters. The administration's daily floggings will continue until morale improves among progressives. Generations of political scientists will marvel at this administration's self-destructive reflexes.

More at..........
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/the-effort-to-claim-that-_b_794862.html

[Angry Dragon]

1. Obama admitted that the tax cuts for the uppers will

not create jobs

[truedelphi]

6. Yet he also states that without them, the

Economy will crash!

Oh! Noes!

[somone]

2. What a joke - all from Wall Street

[KoKo]

13. Banksters Cause Meltdown...and American's suffer....and suffer and will do more/nt

[democracy1st]

3. K & R

[golddigger]

4. Wall Street owns the President, Congress and the American people.

[Kaleko]

17. Yep. Wall Street, big oil and the war industry are in charge of everyone now.

[sasha031]

5. the more I read what is posted, the more my mouth just drops

:eyes:
it feels like Déjà vu...

[Hawkowl]

7. Obama is better than a Rethuglican Pres!

Oh, my bad, I forgot, what is the difference again?

[Ichingcarpenter]

19. A Softer Gentler Regime Change

with better words, but still the same old CEO's and Corporations. running the program
for their greed.

[cui bono]

25. The difference is Obama hurts the Dems more than a Repub pres.

He has pushed the party even farther to the right so that it's not even left of center anymore.

I cannot stand him any more.

[xchrom]

8. As my mother always says: birds of a feather flock together. Nt

[Octafish]

9. ''And what do you know, these economists are all 'wealth managers' or from major banks. ''

Whaddya know, KoKo? One heckuva lot, I believe.

Thank you for the heads-up on this very important article.

For those new to the subject: William K. Black is a forensic economist, author of "The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One."

[slipslidingaway]

10. knr nt

[WillyT]

11. HUGE K & R !!!

:kick:

[upi402]

12. Huge sucking sound

It's not just for NAFTA anymore! Yay failure! Yay!

[frylock]

14. kix0r

:kick:

[KoKo]

15. ....

[Kaleko]

16. K & R

[slipslidingaway]

18. kick nt

[myrna minx]

20. K&R

:-(

[hatrack]

21. Mankiw was the guy who suggested that flipping burgers was really "manufacturing" . . .

After all, you're assembling components to produce something of value, and hey, if that wouldn't reinvigorate manufacturing job numbers, I sure don't know what would.

This was during the Chimpy Years, and no, I 'm not making this up.

[dkf]

22. Oh for Gods sakes...these are the economists who influence the businesses that will hire people.

All the freaking moaning and groaning about the cash that corporations are holding instead of employing people and now we pooh pooh the reports that will start those folks rehiring? Who do you people think you are getting a job from? Even the poor bastard who spends his money probably does it at some corporation unless he is forced to use those crazy expensive neighborhood convenience stores.

Stop spending at any corporate owned entity and quit a job working for a corporate entity and then find out how much of our livelihoods and our daily lives comes from corporations.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

23. K&R "Generations of political scientists will marvel at this administration's self-destructive..."

[cui bono]

24. Obama is the Repubs trojan horse.

He certainly isn't on our side.

[JamesA1102]

26. Robert Greenstein: Congress should approve this package

CBPP Statement: Robert Greenstein, Executive Director, on the Tax Cut-Unemployment Insurance Deal

The deal between President Obama and Republican leaders on tax cuts and unemployment insurance has two substantial positive aspects: its surprisingly strong protections for low- and middle-income working families and its stronger-than-expected boost for the economy and jobs. But it also has two deeply disturbing negative features: not only the extension of the high-end income-tax cuts, but also an egregious estate-tax giveaway that Senator Jon Kyl demanded for the estates of the wealthiest one-quarter of 1 percent of Americans who die.

Congress should approve this package — its rejection will likely lead to a more problematic package that does less for middle- and low-income workers and less for the economy. Then, in 2012, when the economy should be stronger, the President should make clear he will veto any legislation to extend either the high-end tax cuts or the weakening of the estate tax beyond the estate-tax parameters that were in place in 2009, and he should take that case to the country.

The Positives in the Package

In several respects, the package exceeds the expectations we and many other observers had set when the negotiations began.

■ The 13-month extension of federal unemployment benefits is a major accomplishment. Only a few weeks ago, the House fell short of passing a three-month extension. The 13-month extension will prevent 7 million jobless workers from losing essential income support, without which they would have to cut their purchases substantially, causing the loss of many more jobs. The Council of Economic Advisers recently estimated that an end to these benefits would cause the loss of 600,000 ­jobs and cut already-inadequate economic growth by 0.6 percentage points by the end of next year, quite a large amount; Goldman Sachs recently made a similar estimate of the impact on economic growth.

■ The package continues for two years all of the 2009 Recovery Act improvements in the Earned Income Tax Credit, the American Opportunity Tax Credit (which helps students from low- and middle-income families afford college), and the refundable component of the Child Tax Credit. These measures are simultaneously effective stimulus policy, desirable social policy, and admirable anti-poverty policy. They encourage work over welfare and help more Americans obtain a college education; they provide sound stimulus by putting money in the hands of hard-pressed working families that will spend it; and they substantially reduce child poverty.

■ The package also contains a one-year reduction of 2 percentage points in the employee share of the Social Security payroll tax; workers will pay a 4.2 percent tax on their first $106,800 in wages, rather than 6.2 percent. This provision, which would replace the current “Making Work Pay” tax cut, would raise workers’ take-home pay by $120 billion in 2011 (relative to current law) and consequently should provide some economic boost.

These provisions would protect low- and middle-income workers and their families and, by boosting their incomes, also preserve or create substantial numbers of jobs. Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Analytics, estimates that federal unemployment benefits generate $1.60 in economic activity for every dollar in cost; the refundable tax credits generate about $1.20 to $1.40 in activity for each dollar in cost; and the payroll tax reduction generates about $1.25 for each dollar in cost. In other words, all of these measures rank high in “bang-for-the-buck” effectiveness.

In this part of the package, the White House achieved everything it sought for low- and middle-income families. It apparently did not compromise on these issues.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3340

[AzDar]

27. I *know* the President isn't stupid, so he is either corrupt, or a liar...or both.

:puke: