As the massive new stimulus bill, which President Obama is now preparing to sign into law, was undergoing consideration in the Senate, Americans wondered how much the final price would be. At one point during Senate deliberations, House Majority leader Steny Hoyer, responding to concerns that the Senate version was already tens of billions of dollars larger than the House version, sheepishly told reporters that "the objective is to have a bill of less than $900 billion." Yet less than 24 hours later, the cost of the Senate version of the stimulus package was well over $900 billion and continuing to rise.
Newsweek magazine published the following headline on the cover of its February 16 issue: “We Are All Socialists Now: The Perils and Promise of the New Era of Big Government.” Of course, it’s hard to imagine that we have only now entered the era of “big government” — weren’t we there already? But there is no doubt that both money creation by the Fed and spending by the federal government are accelerating to finance the proliferating bailout and stimulus programs.
On his January 29 TV show, Glenn Beck drew national attention to a relatively obscure graph of our nation's "monetary base" (a narrow definition of money supply, also known as M0) maintained online by the Research Department of the St. Louis Federal Reserve. The reason for the special attention was the dramatic hockey stick shape of the graph that developed during the last few months of 2008. Beginning about September the usually stable graph of monetary base vs. years shot virtually straight up for the remainder of the year.
In a speech in the Treasury’s Cash Room today, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner unveiled yet another initiative to stop the financial crisis in its tracks. “Right now critical parts of our financial system are damaged,” Geithner told his audience, few of whom, in all likelihood, had any idea how America’s financial system works. “Instead of catalyzing recovery,” Geithner continued, “the financial system is working against recovery and that's the dangerous dynamic we need to change."
Is the International Monetary Fund headed toward becoming the Federal Reserve of the world? Although one-world elitists in political and banking circles have been promoting the idea for many years, it has taken the current global economic crisis to provide the appearance of urgency and legitimacy needed to make the Global Fed scheme sellable to the public.
The credit rating of the U.S. government is falling fast. Treasury debt mechanisms have crashed in bond markets this year, forcing Treasury officials to offer a spiral of steeper discounts at auction. Investors are becoming increasingly reluctant to purchase the notes in the face of a rising flood of debt that will be floated by the Treasury Department this year.
What began early last year as a "credit crunch" and an "economic downturn" is now being characterized as a "long, severe recession." Once upon a time, such a crisis was known as a "depression" before Americans became squeamish about such stark language.
“Easily in fiscal year 2009 it’s not out of the realm of possibility to have a $2 trillion deficit,” Mary Ann Hurley, vice president of fixed-income trading in Seattle at D.A. Davidson & Co, told Bloomberg News on February 3. “That’s a huge number, and it has to be financed by debt issuance and the taxpayer.”
Should the stimulus bill be amended to place more emphasis on spending, or should it instead be amended to place more emphasis on tax cuts? That question defines much of the debate on the bill that passed the House without any yea votes from Republicans and is now before the Senate.
President Barack Obama blamed the current economic recession on “a binge of risk taking” by bankers in a Today Show interview that aired February 2. Specifically, here’s how Obama explained how the nation has found itself in a deepening economic crisis:
Common sense tells us that government cannot resuscitate the American economy and restore it to good health by spending more money and going further into debt. The government cannot spend money for its "bailout" and "stimulus" programs, after all, without siphoning the money out of the economy in the first place.