Incoherence

Put aside the fact that the premise that Republicans caused the sequester is a lie, and refuted by none other than Bob Woodward of the Washington Post.   And put aside the triviality of claiming macroeconomic effects from a 2.4% cut in government spending (really just a limit on the growth of government spending).  This is just incoherent:

Obama warned that “every time that we get a piece of economic news” in the coming months, that “economic news could have been better” if not for Republicans’ failure to act. “None of this is necessary,” he continued. “It’s happening because of a choice that Republicans in Congress have made. They have allowed these cuts to happen” in order to prevent tax increases.

So, not putting tens of billions of dollars of government spending into the economy will cause the economy to tank, but taking tens of billions of dollars of taxes out of the economy would not only not cause the same tanking effect, but would somehow make the economy boom?

I've heard of Keynes.   I don't like him much, but I've heard of him.   This isn't Keynes.   I don't know what this is.

Oh, yes, I remember.... it's socialism/fascism -- the only good wealth is wealth that flows through the rent-seekers in government.  


***

By the way, the adjusted estimate for 4Q 2012 GDP growth is 0.1%.   That's slightly up from the first estimate in January of a decline of 0.1%.   But it's a steep falloff from the 3.1% estimated growth for 3Q 2012.

Couple that with this news from yesterday that personal incomes in January shrank by 3.6%, the largest drop in 20 years, and it sure looks like there's a double-dip recession coming, one that obviously started before the sequester.

Obama knows this, and he also knows that he can probably get a pass from most of the MSM on the risible notion that the sequester somehow caused a downturn that started before the sequester occurred.

He's the Lightworker!   Cause and effect mean nothing to him!