ShareThis Page
Obama’s blame game still off base |

Obama’s blame game still off base

President Obama started his speech in Osawatomie, Kan., on Dec. 6 with a positive nod to free-market economics.

Referring to Theodore Roosevelt’s economic thoughts, Obama acknowledged that the free-market system has been the most successful system in history in delivering the highest standard of living to the greatest number of people. “He believed then what we know is true today, that the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history. It’s led to a prosperity and a standard of living unmatched by the rest of the world.”

But then Mr. Obama added a disclaimer, a large one. “But Roosevelt also knew that the free market has never been a free license to take whatever you can from whomever you can.”

That opens the door to more than putting Bernie Madoff in jail. Given the high degree of elasticity in egalitarian and redistributive goals, this gives a free license to politicians to take whatever they can from whomever they can.

Obama then focused on his recurring theme of how “the rich” aren’t doing their “fair share” and also are getting too wealthy while everyone else is getting the short end of the stick.

“Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people,” he asserted. “Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments — wealthier than ever before.”

In fact, prior to the financial crisis and economic crash of 2008, the U.S. Census Bureau reported that income inequality in 2007 had fallen to its lowest level in six years and that the median income, adjusted for inflation, had increased for the third year in a row.

The share of national income going to the top 20 percent of households declined to its smallest share since 2002, reported the Census Bureau, producing greater income equality as the middle class got richer and the top quintile received a smaller slice of the pie.

Then came the 2008 financial collapse and subsequent recession — or as Obama put it in his Osawatomie speech, “the house of cards collapsed.”

Obama described the collapse: “We all know the story by now. Mortgages sold to people who couldn’t afford them or even sometimes understand them. Banks and investors allowed to keep packaging the risk and selling it off. Huge bets and huge bonuses made with other people’s money on the line.”

In short, the “breathtaking greed of a few” in the private sector caused the problem, explained Obama, along with some inept government regulators.

He said nothing about the “breathtaking greed” for votes and power among politicians who started the toxic balls rolling through the financial system by pushing for nothing-down loans on home mortgages for fully unqualified buyers.

Rather than pointing to the housing collapse as a classic lesson in how unintended consequences flow from ill-conceived government policies, Obama spotlighted only the “mortgage lenders that tricked families into buying homes they couldn’t afford.”

And what’s happening at the very top, while the poor are being “tricked” by the rich• “Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1 percent — 1 percent,” declared Obama. “That is the height of unfairness.”

Responded The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column: “An administration official conceded the White House had no actual data to back up the president’s assertion.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.