Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What the Omamaites fail to understand is that this guy is NOT the Messiah (and it is they who keep calling him that) and that he is not going to cure all their ills with a wave of his hand.
This is so ridiculous, all this excitement over a man who is so inexperienced, with no new ideas, and nothing new to say. What do they think is going to happen? These people believe that their lives have suddenly changed for the better.
If he does what he says he's going to do, there's going to be a lot more suffering, and loss of jobs, and these people are not going to be one bit happy.
Trust me. I lived through Jimmy Carter. What's happening now is much like what happened then.
You right wingers jeeringly called him the messiah. Nobody else did, or does. Please try to understand this...or don't, up to you.
Nobody thinks he's going to cure cancer, walk on water, fly on a magic unicorn to come visit us etc.; no one thinks their lives would suddenly change for the better upon inauguration. You RIGHT WINGERS made this all up and applied it to Obama supporters, as usual.
But more importantly, how does your economic plan improve upon his? Please compare and contrast.
Nobody thinks he's going to cure cancer, walk on water, fly on a magic unicorn to come visit us etc.; no one thinks their lives would suddenly change for the better upon inauguration. You RIGHT WINGERS made this all up and applied it to Obama supporters, as usual.
But more importantly, how does your economic plan improve upon his? Please compare and contrast.
Well, if I had anything to do with it, my economic plan, in a rough matter of speaking, would curtail spending except in the areas the Constitution provided for, which is to say defense, police, and courts. Education is even very tricky here, because in theory, local property taxes or state budgets were intended to provide these funds. Transportation is another gray area, since the interstate highway system can technically have its budget outlayed by the federal government due to the presence of the Commerce Clause. However, beyond these departments, I would rescind all entitlement programs. Public housing, welfare, etc, would all be jettisoned. This 'stimulus' plan, that Obama has outlined over the past 2 days, is a euphemism for welfare. It is targeted towards people who haven't earned it. My plan would be to reward those who have contributed to society, in the form of reducing income taxes. The rate of taxation would be flat: you pay a fixed % of what you earn, whether it be $1, $10,000, or $1,000,000. There are people in our society, who by virtue of their talents, their leadership capabilities, and their drive, who have improved the lives of others around them by providing jobs, and giving their families a semblance of security. These are the people who need to be uplifted and championed. Obama, and more importantly, congress, don't see it my way. They desire to cap executive salaries from those who have taken risks, built companies and have succeeded through work ethic. (However, these same people don't seem to have a problem with movie stars, sports athletes, etc, those who really provide nothing but entertainment, earning as much as they can. The owners of the sports teams, however, that's a different story!) Likewise, these same politicians have an insaitable desire to take money from these few, and give it to the many who don't possess the same drive, or brains to do what really makes a one very vital cog in a capitalistic society, which is to say, the creation and formation of wealth. Not many people can lead others. It's a very intangible quality. There are a very few out there that possess those skills to formulate a successful business plan, put it into action, and improve the lives of others by hiring them. Yet, these are the people that Obama and the socialists want to destroy. Conversely, there are many out there, who really just don't have the tools, for whatever reason. Yes, there are lazy people, there are slackers. But there are also people who can't cut it due to a variety of social factors, whether it be born into poverty, born into a broken home, etc. And this is the big grenade in the political football arena. I strongly believe that government was not intended to redress the inequities of human beings. I think that function is best served by philanthropy. However, it seems the majority out there don't agree with that, and that's why the Democrat party as we know it now is so successful. There are those out there, most of them who vote Democrat, who think that taking money from successful people and giving it to less successful people is the best way to operate a society. You want proof? Go to your nearest public housing dwelling in the closest large city to your household. You want an even more shocking visual on how giving money to undeserving people doesn't work? Take a long ride to rural North Dakota, rural South Dakota, and visit an Indian reservation there. The federal government has given these folks everything (due to guilt and redress) and have succeeded in making life for these poor souls even worse than if we had done nothing for them at all. The people in these places live at levels that are way more in line with Latin America than the United States of America. It's absolutely shocking to witness the levels of poverty there. What does an urban housing project and an Indian Reservation have in common? Federal money, and lots of it. Throwing money at a problem will never, ever, work, because the recipient of that aid needs something the government can't manufacture, in the name of time. Time for education, time for conselling, time to exhibit that there is a better way to live your life than awaiting the next morsel or crumb in your mailbox on the first of every month.
My plan wouldn't immediately cure the ills of all people, but it would be greatly beneficial to those who have the temerity to start a business, and to those who take successful business risks.
Obama promised the world while running for president. He promised he would make the world a better place for everyone. Finally! A president who promises a lot while running! I think he might be the first one to do that!
I am not saying he is bad, but let's wait and see if anything is different a few months from now before we celebrate. We all forget the magnitude of presidential candidates' promises in eight years...
Well, if I had anything to do with it, my economic plan, in a rough matter of speaking, would curtail spending except in the areas the Constitution provided for, which is to say defense, police, and courts. Education is even very tricky here, because in theory, local property taxes or state budgets were intended to provide these funds. Transportation is another gray area, since the interstate highway system can technically have its budget outlayed by the federal government due to the presence of the Commerce Clause. However, beyond these departments, I would rescind all entitlement programs. Public housing, welfare, etc, would all be jettisoned. This 'stimulus' plan, that Obama has outlined over the past 2 days, is a euphemism for welfare. It is targeted towards people who haven't earned it. My plan would be to reward those who have contributed to society, in the form of reducing income taxes. The rate of taxation would be flat: you pay a fixed % of what you earn, whether it be $1, $10,000, or $1,000,000. There are people in our society, who by virtue of their talents, their leadership capabilities, and their drive, who have improved the lives of others around them by providing jobs, and giving their families a semblance of security. These are the people who need to be uplifted and championed. Obama, and more importantly, congress, don't see it my way. They desire to cap executive salaries from those who have taken risks, built companies and have succeeded through work ethic. (However, these same people don't seem to have a problem with movie stars, sports athletes, etc, those who really provide nothing but entertainment, earning as much as they can. The owners of the sports teams, however, that's a different story!) Likewise, these same politicians have an insaitable desire to take money from these few, and give it to the many who don't possess the same drive, or brains to do what really makes a one very vital cog in a capitalistic society, which is to say, the creation and formation of wealth. Not many people can lead others. It's a very intangible quality. There are a very few out there that possess those skills to formulate a successful business plan, put it into action, and improve the lives of others by hiring them. Yet, these are the people that Obama and the socialists want to destroy. Conversely, there are many out there, who really just don't have the tools, for whatever reason. Yes, there are lazy people, there are slackers. But there are also people who can't cut it due to a variety of social factors, whether it be born into poverty, born into a broken home, etc. And this is the big grenade in the political football arena. I strongly believe that government was not intended to redress the inequities of human beings. I think that function is best served by philanthropy. However, it seems the majority out there don't agree with that, and that's why the Democrat party as we know it now is so successful. There are those out there, most of them who vote Democrat, who think that taking money from successful people and giving it to less successful people is the best way to operate a society. You want proof? Go to your nearest public housing dwelling in the closest large city to your household. You want an even more shocking visual on how giving money to undeserving people doesn't work? Take a long ride to rural North Dakota, rural South Dakota, and visit an Indian reservation there. The federal government has given these folks everything (due to guilt and redress) and have succeeded in making life for these poor souls even worse than if we had done nothing for them at all. The people in these places live at levels that are way more in line with Latin America than the United States of America. It's absolutely shocking to witness the levels of poverty there. What does an urban housing project and an Indian Reservation have in common? Federal money, and lots of it. Throwing money at a problem will never, ever, work, because the recipient of that aid needs something the government can't manufacture, in the name of time. Time for education, time for conselling, time to exhibit that there is a better way to live your life than awaiting the next morsel or crumb in your mailbox on the first of every month.
My plan wouldn't immediately cure the ills of all people, but it would be greatly beneficial to those who have the temerity to start a business, and to those who take successful business risks.
Nobody thinks he's going to cure cancer, walk on water, fly on a magic unicorn to come visit us etc.; no one thinks their lives would suddenly change for the better upon inauguration. You RIGHT WINGERS made this all up and applied it to Obama supporters, as usual.
Hey, I think I just figured out why people on this forum were so ticked off during the inauguration. The right wingers really believed all that stuff and they were bummed when they didn't see Obama fly down Pennsylvania Ave on his magic unicorn!
Great idea, shrinking back to defense, police, and courts. But as you point out about education, reality is gray and it tends to turn good clean ideas into huge bureaucratic messes colored every shade of gray.
Cutting off welfare and closing public housing really isnt a practical answer. (We can watch and see how this works in real life, though, in California over the next couple of months.) You're exaggerating Obama's plans and what he has said over and over about government dependence and personal responsibility.
The only thing in the federal offing concerning CEO overcompensation is the Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act, which hasnt yet passed the Senate. Is that too intrusive?
Hey, I think I just figured out why people on this forum were so ticked off during the inauguration. The right wingers really believed all that stuff and they were bummed when they didn't see Obama fly down Pennsylvania Ave on his magic unicorn!
You know they would have believed Sarah Palin on a magic unicorn. ("It's not a broom!")
Hey, I think I just figured out why people on this forum were so ticked off during the inauguration. The right wingers really believed all that stuff and they were bummed when they didn't see Obama fly down Pennsylvania Ave on his magic unicorn!
Wow they are really wacking out today in mass. I hope they don't start popping corks in real life. If that happens there won't be any WingNuts from the Right left on here to provide entertainment. The Left WingNuts are to serious and intellectual to provide many laughs.
You know they would have believed Sarah Palin on a magic unicorn. ("It's not a broom!")
Don't got there now about those rumors and Sarah. Let sleeping dogs remain in Alaska.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
