Barack Obama to hail himself as the new Franklin D. Roosevelt: President promises 'bold, persistent' leadership like FDR during the Great Depression

By Toby Harnden In Charlotte, North Carolina

President Barack Obama will tonight lay out his case for being re-elected to a second term by comparing himself to Franklin D. Roosevelt, who won an unprecedented three presidential elections and led America to recovery after the Great Depression.

He will say: 'And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort, shared responsibility, and the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.'

Obama will formally accept the Democratic presidential nomination, capping a week in which speeches from his wife Michelle Obama and Bill Clinton, the husband of his erstwhile rival, received widespread praise.

He will tell Americans: 'Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be met. The path we offer may be harder, but it leads to a better place.'

Speech excerpts released in advance showed that Obama would attempt to frame the election not as a referendum on his four-year term, during which unemployment has risen to 8.3 per cent, leaving more than 23 million Americans out of work, but as a choice between him and Mitt Romney, the Republican nominee.

'On every issue, the choice you face won’t be just between two candidates or two parties,' he was due to say. 'It will be a choice between two different paths for America. A choice between two fundamentally different visions for the future.'

This November's election, he argued, will represent 'the clearest choice of any time in a generation' between two different visions.

'Over the next few years, big decisions will be made in Washington, on jobs and the economy; taxes and deficits; energy and education; war and peace – decisions that will have a huge impact on our lives and our children’s lives for decades to come.

'I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick or easy. I never have. You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth.

'And the truth is, it will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades. It will require common effort, shared responsibility, and the kind of bold, persistent experimentation that Franklin Roosevelt pursued during the only crisis worse than this one.

'And by the way – those of us who carry on his party’s legacy should remember that not every problem can be remedied with another government program or diktat from Washington.

In a plea for four more years, he will say: 'But know this, America: Our problems can be solved. Our challenges can be met. The path we offer may be harder, but it leads to a better place.

'And I’m asking you to choose that future. I’m asking you to rally around a set of goals for your country – goals in manufacturing, energy, education, national security, and the deficit; a real, achievable plan that will lead to new jobs, more opportunity, and rebuild this economy on a stronger foundation.

'That’s what we can do in the next four years, and that’s why I’m running for a second term as President of the United States.'

Obama will also lay out a series of 'goals for America' in a second term. These will include creating a million new manufacturing jobs by the end of 2016, doubling exports by the end of 2014 and cutting net oil imports in half by 2020.

On education, he will pledge to help cut the growth of college tuition in half over the next 10 years, recruit 100,000 maths and science teachers over the next 10 decade and train two million workers for 'real jobs' at community colleges

He will also pledge to 'invest in the economy with the money we’re no longer spending on war' and reduce 'the deficit' by more than $4 trillion over the next decade - an apparent reference to the $16 trillion national debt, not the annual federal spending rate.
In a statement, Romney said that Obama should report back on his previous promises, not offer new ones.

'I actually think it will be interesting to listen to the President tonight. What I’d like him to do is report on his promises, but there are forgotten promises and forgotten people.

'Over the last four years, the President has said that he was going to create jobs for the American people and that hasn’t happened. He said he would cut the deficit in half and that hasn’t happened.

He said that incomes would rise and instead incomes have gone down.

'And I think this is a time not for him not to start restating new promises, but to report on the promises he made. I think he wants a promises reset. We want a report on the promises he made.'

It is not the first time Obama has compared himself to Franklin Roosevelt or other great American presidents. Last December, he told ’60 Minutes’: I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president, with the possible exceptions of [Lyndon B.]Johnson, FDR, and [Abraham] Lincoln.'

This year, he conjured up the memory of President Ronald Reagan when he said that his so-called Buffett Rule raising taxes on those earning over $1 million a year was similar to a measure introduced by one of his predecessors.

'This president gave another speech where he said it was ‘crazy’ - that’s a quote -  that certain tax loopholes make it possible for multimillionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying 10 per cent of his salary,' he said in May.

‘That wild-eyed, socialist, tax-hiking class warrior was Ronald Reagan…if it’ll help convince folks in Congress to make the right choice, we could call it the 'Reagan Rule' instead of the 'Buffett Rule'.’

Back in 2008, Obama said he didn’t view himself as ‘some sort of singular figure’ but then invoked Reagan and John F. Kennedy.

'I don't want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what is different is the times,’ he told the Reno Gazette-Journal. ‘I do think that, for example, the 1980 election was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not.’

He added: ‘I think Kennedy, 20 years earlier, moved the country in a fundamentally different direction. So I think a lot of it has to do with the times. I think we are in one of those fundamentally different times right now were people think that things, the way they are going, just aren't working.’

Last year, Obama invoked America’s first president George Washington when talking about ‘the problem’ of taxes. ‘George Washington grappled with the problem,’ he said. ‘He said, “Towards the payment of debts, there must be revenue, and to have revenue, there must be taxes. And no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant.'

‘But he understood that dealing with the debt is - his choice of words – 'always a choice of difficulties'. He also knew that public servants weren’t elected to do what is easy; they weren’t elected to do what was politically advantageous. It’s our responsibility to put country before party.

It‘s our responsibility to do what’s right for the future. And that’s what this debate is about.’

At a May 2011 fundraiser in New York, Obama compared how Martin Luther King had been treated with the criticism he had experienced since entering the White House.

‘There was a decade that followed the great successes of Birmingham and Selma in which he was just struggling, fighting the good fight, and scorned, and many folks angry. But what he understood, what kept him going, was that the arc of moral universe is long but it bends towards justice.’

Turk - Capital Controls, Panic, The Great Depression & Gold

With tremendous volatility in global markets, today King World News interviewed James Turk out of Europe. Turk told KWN that we are headed into an extraordinarily dangerous time for both the markets and the financial system, that will end in a massive panic. Here is what Turk had to say about what is taking place: “Today was a very important day, Eric, because gold was strong while the stock markets were weak. This is a trend I expect to continue, and one that will baffle many financial analysts, going forward, that don’t understand this type of cycle.”

James Turk continues:

“I was hoping to see more strength in the precious metals at the end of last week, Eric, given the pummeling gold and silver were given. But I guess that was too much to ask for with July option expiry this week.

Having driven the price of gold and silver down to this low level, I assume the paper-shorts will try to keep prices as low as possible, in order to maximize their profit by having calls they sold expire out of the money. We've seen this happen many times over the years....

“But there has not been any change in my thinking. Gold and silver are simply testing the May lows. So far the test has been successful. More importantly, we have to keep foremost in our minds that gold and silver remain in a bull market. I keep being reminded of this fact every time I look at the news, which keeps getting worse over here in Europe.

I think Nigel Farage got it exactly right in his interview with you on Friday. He said that the leaders over here need to resort to financial ‘repression’ to keep the euro project from falling apart. Of course that is not a solution, but simply a stop-gap by panicky leaders, who don't know what to do or who listen to bad advice.

Anyway, after Nigel's interview, the Spanish government announced the imposition of various capital controls, limiting the use of cash by companies and individuals. Expect more capital controls, soon, throughout the eurozone. That will only add to the panic, which is already bubbling just below the surface.

As we know, Eric, government actions like these do nothing to solve the problem. Financial repression is never a solution. Capital controls only buy more time, but you can't do that forever. So money continues to leave the European banks. The bank runs are not disappearing. In fact, they jumped across the Atlantic to South America, where Argentine banks are rapidly losing dollar-denominated deposits.

Bank runs were a focal point of the Great Depression, but they were just part of a bigger 3-step process that has parallels to today. After the 1929 stock market crash, people moved money out of investments and put it into banks. They wanted the liquidity, and, at first, did not fear for the safety of their money on deposit. We went though this step with the Lehman collapse.

As the economy weakened in the 1930s, people started to convert their deposits into cash currency. This was the second part of the crisis, when fear for the safety of one's money became more important than liquidity. We are now at stage two in Europe, and soon will be reaching this stage in the US. The downgrade of the major US banks, last week, is bringing heightened awareness of the fragility of the US banking system, meaning they are extremely very vulnerable to an economic downturn.

Europe's economy is clearly on a downward path, and economic activity in the US is slowing too. So the third step of the process might be closer than we think. That's when, in the 1930's, people moved out of cash, and into gold.

They did so back then because even though the US dollar was still formally tied to gold, people began to understand that there was more paper outstanding than there was gold in the US reserve. They believed that the US government could not possibly keep its promise to redeem $20.67 for one ounce of gold, so they moved out of paper-currency.

Importantly, they were right. President Roosevelt eventually devalued the dollar by 69.4%, dropping the gold content of one US dollar from 23.23 grains to 13.71 grains of fine gold. He adjusted the price of gold from $20.67 an ounce to $35 an ounce.

In the 1930's, if people we lucky enough to get their money out of any of the hundreds of banks that failed, they didn't want to take any more chances, Eric. They soon realized that the paper currency in their hand wasn't much safer than when they had their money on deposit in a bank. The panic to obtain gold or silver marked the bottom of the Great Depression. The solution was a higher gold price, and that is the same solution needed today.

President Roosevelt knew the solution in the 1930s, and lowered the gold content of the dollar, thereby raising the gold price. Central planners don't like that solution because it takes away the power they now have with fiat currencies, backed by nothing but their promises, but a higher gold price is coming nonetheless. It is the only solution.”

Americans’ wealth plummeted 40 percent from 2007 to 2010, Federal Reserve says

By Ylan Q. Mui

The recent recession wiped out nearly two decades of Americans’ wealth, according to government data released Monday, with middle-class families bearing the brunt of the decline.

The Federal Reserve said the median net worth of families plunged by 39 percent in just three years, from $126,400 in 2007 to $77,300 in 2010. That puts Americans roughly on par with where they were back in 1992.

The data represent one of the most detailed looks to date of how the economic downturn altered the landscape of family finance. Over a span of three years, Americans watched progress that took almost a generation to accumulate evaporate. The promise of retirement built on the inevitable rise of the stock market proved illusory for most. Homeownership, once heralded as a pathway to wealth, became an albatross.

Those findings underscore the depth of the wounds of the financial crisis and how far many families remain from healing. If the recession set Americans back 20 years, economists say, the road forward is sure to be a long one. And so far, the country has only seen a halting recovery.

“It’s hard to overstate how serious the collapse in the economy was,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody’s Analytics. “We were in free fall.”

The recession caused the greatest upheaval among the middle class. Only roughly half of middle-class Americans remained on the same economic rung during the downturn, the Fed found. Their median net worth — the value of assets such as homes, automobiles and stocks minus any debt — suffered the biggest drops. By contrast, the wealthiest families’ median net worth rose slightly.

Americans have tried to rebalance the family budget but have found it difficult to reverse the damage.
The survey showed that fewer families are carrying credit card balances, and those who do have less debt. The median balance dropped 16 percent, from $3,100 in 2007 to $2,600 in 2010. The Fed also found that the percentage of Americans who have no debt rose to a quarter of families.

But that progress was undermined by other factors, leaving the median level of family debt unchanged. The report said more families reported taking out education loans. Nearly 11 percent said they were at least 60 days late paying a bill, up from 7 percent in 2007. And the percentage of families saddled with debts greater than 40 percent of their income stayed the same.

Not only were Americans still facing significant debts, but they were making less money. Median income fell nearly 8 percent to $45,800 in 2010. The median value of stock-market-based retirement accounts declined 7 percent to $44,000.

But it was the implosion of the housing market that inflicted much of the pain. The value of Americans’ stake in their homes fell by 42 percent between 2007 and 2010 to $55,000, according to the Fed.

The poorest families suffered the biggest loss of wealth from the drop in real estate prices. But middle-class Americans rely on housing for a larger part of their net worth. For some, it accounts for just more than half of their assets. That means every step downward is felt more acutely.

Rakesh Kochhar, associate director of research at the Pew Hispanic Center, calls this phenomenon the “reverse wealth effect.” As consumers watched the value of their homes rise during the boom, they felt more confident spending money, even if they did not actually cash in on the gains. Now, the moribund housing market has made many Americans wary of spending, even if their losses are just on paper.

According to the Fed survey, that paper wealth — or what is officially called unrealized capital gains — shrunk 11 percentage points to about a quarter of American’s assets.

The findings track research Kochhar released last year that showed a dramatic drop in household wealth during the recession, particularly among minorities. That study found record-high disparities between whites’ wealth and that of blacks and Hispanics.

“It was turning the clock back quite a bit,” Kochhar said.

The Fed’s survey is conducted every three years. Although there have been some signs that the recovery has picked up — housing prices have begun to stabilize and unemployment has fallen — Fed economists said those improvements largely do not change the survey results.

“Recovery from the so-called Great Recession has also been particularly slow,” the report said.