No miraculous changes in policy
Slow growth, many barriers for businesses
Higher taxes for middle class
Debt high, interest very high
Not address Social Security or Medicare
Electricity costs skyrocket
Restricted oil production
Continued divisiveness and fighting, uncivil language, fighting the 1%
HIGH SPENDING - AND HIGHER TAXES FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS
Unless he changes his demeanor by a large degree, high spending (increasing from $2.8 trillion in 2007 to $3.8 trillion in 2013) and big deficits will force, at some point, large tax increases on the middle class. It is impossible to tax the rich enough (because there are so few of them, they could only cover a portion of the deficit and taxing them could hurt investing for the economy), so we will be required to tap the only other pool of resources (if we don't want to go the way of Greece): the Middle Class. Obama's representing the Tax The Rich to pay for benefits for the middle class is disingenous at best and harmfully misleading at worst, as it causes us not to address the big impact items that are needed. Tax The Rich cannot be enough of a solution, only a bit of a help, but not a cure at all.
It's simple math, if you assume there is a limit to how much we can borrow at a super high pace.
National debt owed to others $16 tr
Unfunded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare $50+ tr (He has refused to deal with this, though he
does criticize the plans of others. He has not
proposed a specific plan.)
2013 budget 3.8 tr Revenue 2.5tr
Already paid in personal income tax 1.2 tr
Paid by Corporations .2 tr
Deficit 1.3 tr
If tax additional 10% on all (including millionaires)
above $200K (single), $250K (joint) .24 tr (17% of the deficit) Tax The Rich
Personal income taxes would have to doubled to pay for the deficit. Of course, future generations could pay for our increasing debt, too, but they have to somehow cover the unfunded liabilities for Social Security and Medicare, as the good fairy is not likely to show up.
I would say that reelecting Obama virtually guarantees much higher taxes because he has shown no willingness to forego additional giving to "the people" nor to curtail expenses.
DEBT INTEREST INCREASES
Note that current interest rates have been driven way down to spur economic growth, by the independent Federal Reserve run by Bernanke and that he intends to keep it low until 2014 because of the poor economic growth. So the current interest on the national debt is relatively low. The cost for interest will be $247 billion in 2013 and $565 billion in 2017, unless interest rates go up, in which case we'll run up to $1 trillion in interest costs, driving up the deficit further. It is unsustainable and we must realize that.
NOT CONFRONTING THE BIGGEST TWO ISSUES
As I mentioned, someone will have to suffer if our next President does not address Social Security and Medicare insolvency. Somehow this seems to many to be "far off into the future" and we tend to think somehow the problem will disappear - but that is impossible. He has refused to address it - and there is no reason I know of to expect his behavior to change, plus I'm not sure he understands the financial and economics involved.
This is immense, earth shaking, critical, not to be put off - yet he ignores it, other than rhetoric of we oughta do something about it. No plan at all.
WHETHER HE DOES WELL FOR THE ECONOMY MAY BE A MOOT POINT
Though I think there is a super obvious very large advantage for Romney, we could even assume they are dead even there - and we'd still have enough even before this. And Romney wouldn't be in the hindering mode.
Though he has shown that he sets up barriers and hindrances for economic growth, we need not argue the point. We could just say he did a decent job. But it doesn't matter much, as we will be in a huge deficit/debt and then high tax problem. And the high taxes will, for the middle class, take from their ability to spend, which will then drive the economic growth down or even negative, further exacerbating revenue and deficit problems.
Unless there is a miracle his Presidency is not viable and it would be a huge mistake to assume that somehow he will get wiser and more disciplined.
You could stop here, as there is enough to make a decision on already. Or you may be interested in what else will happen in his next term.
It all seems so obvious to me, so factual, and totally not in even the conjecture range.
But there is more.
THE CONTEST BETWEEN OIL, ALTERNATIVES, AND COSTING OUR BUDGETS
Putting more cost burdens on us could be argued to be like a tax. If Obama would have gotten his cap and trade bill passed, we would have had to bear very high electricity bills. And he still wants to increase the price of gasoline so that we are forced to put alternative energy sources into place. But alternative energy is still impractical with energy costs being double or more of what our cheaper resources are. The classic video on this is: Electricity Costs Will Skyrocket. He is not balancing the tradeoffs nor being practical about climate warming. (See Climate Warming.)
If he continues to impede oil permits and drilling (and pipelines), we will have no chance of
1. Gaining a significant number of jobs for Americans,
2. Gaining oil independence (without any cost to the climate, as the same oil would just have to have been produced elsewhere on the planet), and, of course, security from the dependence on foreign unfriendlies
3. Gaining additional royalties and taxes on profits to offset the deficits,
4. Gaining funds that could be effectively allocated to research and development of alternative energy sources (and uses) [avoiding supporting poor financial models such as Solyndra, and avoiding having government make decisions where it is not competent],
5. Significantly helping to balance our trade deficit (and helping to offset the reduction in purchasing power of the dollar, which deficit would cause Americans to buy goods more expensively, hurting individuals' budgets.
And he would not have a plan over time on when it is cost effective to introduce alternative sources of energy or uses. (Old boring Romney would just plod along, setting effective plans in writing, which he knows must be done to be effective in management, getting all the super experts together and actually understanding what they are saying and how to implement it in a realistic way. Boring! [Or is it?])
Romney has a plan that seems reasonable and not punitive, His consulting experience seems to have looked at how to do this in a practical way: self-deportation. To have penalties for hiring illegally to be so high that demand would dry up. And then, with no means of support to anticipate having, those entering illegally would choose to not do so and/or would leave.
But Obama is favored by hispanics, whom he has promised to do nice things for. However, he has not completed his promises. He is running a defacto Dream Act game by choosing to direct his administration not to enforce any of the laws (except for known criminals, of course). However, we would continue to accept all the murders that Arizona Governor Brewer is fighting so hard to prevent.
We would still have the dilemma, as Obama, as is repeated over and over in Suskind's "documentary" book Confidence Men would just not confront thorny issues - and there's "no adult in the White House".
BUDGETS VOTED DOWN
Obama has shown a strong resistance to establishing where to draw the line between giving out more benefits and continue spending and huge deficits. His budgets have been voted down 97-0 and 400+-0.
We have an expensive health care program that will add to the deficit, though it could be well worth it, but we'd have to cut more elsewhere.
He has shown no inclination to recognize the problem, in a true sense instead of just rhetoric, and to deal with it, as shown by his budgets!
I would think that people would question that, as nobody would run a large corporation that way!???
POSITIVE BILLS HELD UP AND NOT VOTED ON
Although there is no agreement on a comprehensive compromise, he could urge Reid to address the 33 or so jobs bills already passed in the House, as they cannot be all bad, especially since some of them were proposed in the President's "jobs plan". In the latter, though, he insisted on inserting new taxes that had a zero chance of ever passing; he chose to embrace the opportunity for political make-wrong in lieu of what is practical and beneficial for the Americans.
Is that the type of behavior we want from the President, who should be "the adult in the room", working with others to make progress, to strike winning compromises, and engage in high level civil language and cooperation.