Niall Ferguson: voters don't seem to be making an economically-based choice between Romney & Obama
The Niall Ferguson column appeared in the 9/17/12 issue of Newsweek. Now I like Newsweek, the only idiot writing in it is Niall. I know some people are p'd off about the cover story that cr*pped all over Obama, but realize that just 2 weeks before that, they did a "Wimp Factor" cover story on Romney.
Anyway, here is my letter to Newsweek -- letters@newsweek.org
-------------------------------------
Niall Ferguson writes, [font color=blue]“when asked to rank issues, voters mostly put the economy at the top of the list. And yet when asked to make a choice between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, their choices don’t seem to be economically based”.[/font]
LOL. My favoring Obama is ALMOST ENTIRELY ECONOMICALLY BASED. First, I’m an investor nearing retirement. I CAN’T AFFORD ANOTHER CRASH. I look at the S&P 500 – down 37% during Bush’s 8 years and up about 70% under Obama.
Next I look at jobs – 4.6 million private sector jobs created in the last 30 months (under Obama). Bush’s 8-year record? 700,000 private sector jobs lost. I can’t afford to lose my job and not be able to find a new one.
I realize it is Romney, not Bush, that is up for election. However, so far as I can figure out, Romney is Bush on steroids -- $5 trillion in tax rate cuts and $2 trillion more in core defense spending over the next decade, and he promises to balance the budget. Yeah, right Mr. Wizard. He won’t tell us what tax deductions and credits he will reduce or eliminate and what loopholes he will close to pay for all this. The Ryan budget spending cuts are trivial compared to the $7 trillion additional fiscal gap being opened.
Oh, and now he’s proposing RomneyCare II that will cover pre-existing conditions, but no hint of how he’s going to pay for that!
Signed, Name and Address
= new reply since forum marked as read
