Our country is going through a serious recession. Some may even call it a depression. There are those that want us to stay the course and things will work themselves out. There are those who want to be so proactive it may put us so far behind the eight ball we’d never be able to come back. Somewhere there is a happy medium. The only problem is our political system went from a genius formula of democracy, where two sides came together with one good idea. The problem is that now, we have two parties who can’t see eye to eye on anything. Economics, unemployment and health are three huge issues that both of these parties are so far apart that there is no sign of a compromise and frankly, no sign of repair.
Most of my friends are republicans and I’ve always been a little frustrated with them because they lack the argument skills that my fellow democrats have. This is not to say they are less intelligent, but it’s a matter of tact. When 9/11 happened, when the deficit, the national debt and unemployment all almost doubled by the end of his eight years, they blamed Clinton. All the arms they’ve sold to terrorist regimes and the ones they’ve sold for the better part of thirty years, they blamed Bill Clinton. Clinton didn’t have anything to do with this and they know it. But he’s an easy blame because he’s not around. Now, when we point out all the atrocities and all the turmoil that not only hasn’t really changed in three years, they want to say it’s not their fault. Some say it’s accountability, which I also criticize the democrats fully for. Let’s stop blaming others. This has become the American way. Accountability isn’t my biggest problem with the average Republican. What bothers me the most is the incessant contradictions that their arguments are riddled.
A few people and I debated some things today on Facebook and I went back and forth with someone I don’t know. Obviously, I will not show you their names, because it is not my desire to call any individual out, but I found that in their arguments, they did nothing more than prove my point and then, in a complete shock, admitted that they are part of the problem (well indirectly). The following the complete thread (as to not be accused of taking anything out of context (which I like to now call what republican’s call “getting Palin’ed.” You know, how “when man and dinosaurs walked the earth 6,000 years ago” was taken out of context. Sorry, I couldn’t help myself. Democrats might be simple folk, but we know that Land of the Lost was only a TV show.
Following some of the statements will be some reactions to what I'm thinking now about what was said.
Original Poster - Standard and Poor's "we lowered the credit rating because we have no confidence that the current elected politicians of this country are able and capable of doing anything to stabilize the US economy" (Paraphrased)
Jon Hopper- I want to know who is rating Standard & Poor's....they came out with a report which had a 2 trillion dollar error. So what did they do? They deleted the error and came out with the exact same report. Amazing that nobody has commented on this.
While I knew the basics of what S&P does, my real question was who audits them. I also find it interesting that an organization is allowed to become this powerful. It makes me question if they aren’t, in part responsible for all the new found problems Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain.
Original Poster - I was not aware of this, but interesting. Who is Standard and Poor's anyway, after all, right???
At least both parties are saying WTF?
J.A. - I think the American public would have to agree with Standard and Poor's assessment of our government. Maybe they're racist? LOL. Personally, I don't believe that there was an error. I think that's propaganda made up by the Obama machine to try to undermine S & P. We are in deep shit. We have no leadership and congress is doing whatever the hell they want.
OK, so the first comment trying to throw Obama under the bus makes a joke about racism, then follows it up with the error being made up. Sadly, the racist joke, followed by just kidding is becoming too common. That’s not even the worst part. The worst is someone is commenting on something they themselves have not researched. S&P admitted the error and that was made public.
Original Poster - We are doom J.A., no matter how we look at it, who says what, etc......Just look around, that is all you have to do.
J.A. - This BS with blaming previous admins is getting tired. Are we stupid? They seem to think so. Every president inherits problems from previous presidents. It's never been used an excuse before. Did Roosevelt simply blame Hoover for the depression? No. The mark of a great president isn't even whether he can make things better - just don't make things worse. "We" elected a man who never held an executive position to the highest executive position in the country. He had no experience and no qualifications and this is what many expected to happen. He's not just a figure head - the office is important.
It’s actually always been used before and we call it campaigning. That’s what our incumbents and our hopefuls do constantly. It’s greater every election because of our increased media outlets. I detail this later in the debate. As for his never holding an executive position, this is not only wrong, but is sadly widely believed. He was a state senator for the 13th District of Illinois for eight years and followed that with being one of the State’s senators for four years following. Ironically, Obama held and executive office for seven years more than Bush, but apparently, this doesn’t count.
J.A. - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission oversees S & P. The downgrade wasn't just about numbers. It's a reflection of the circus going on in Washington. It's about the lack of stability in our government. It's about a lot of finger pointing and blaming going on without any results.
Actually the SEC doesn’t oversee the S&P. The SEC basically does what the S&P does on a smaller level from what I understand. I do agree with the reason given for the downgrade. S&P came right out and said they did regardless of the numbers.
Jon Hopper - J.A., S&P admitted the error and said their decision was based more on congress than on the president. As for the "blaming past administrations," it's always been done. Bush supporters love using this line, but the reality is the debt, the deficit and unemployment were devastated during his tenure. There are no numbers to dispute that. The problem is when you create 120,000 jobs and the Federal Government lays off 38,000 and Wall St companies lay off another couple of thousand. The numbers get skewed. Even more ironic was your Roosevelt/Hoover analogy. Roosevelt milked the media, but not entirely the same way as is being done by outlets like FOX. Did you know that when he became President, almost nobody who voted for him knew he was crippled? Think about that in today's world. Even funnier is that Hoover's Laisse Faire approach is almost to the tee what Bush thought he could do and McCain wanted to continue. This is exactly why he lost. The difference is that congress knew they had to be proactive and use the government to create jobs. Has Obama been solid...no, but what he has to deal with, coupled by the media scrutiny and yes, the race issue, is huge. No president in our history has had as little power as he has. Sadly, he'll be gone, either in two years or six and we'll suffer throughout, regardless.
My comment about “no numbers to dispute that” meant that there is nothing Republicans can come up with to show it is Bush’s fault. The numbers prove it. Although the numbers prove that Reagan almost crushed us and nobody believes it.
J.A. - You make some good points but I disagree with Obama being powerless. I don't believe his hands are tied. He made moves that have been unprecedented - You don't do that without power. He promised change not excuses. I think race has only helped him - let's face it, he wouldn't have gotten elected if he was white. The media loves him, with the exception of FOX. No president in history has been at odds with the American people like this one. Fact - He has spent more money than any ten presidents combined - in this economy. He inherited a mess - who didn't .Making it worse is his fault. Blaming past admins (even if it's been done before) can't be the answer to everything. I reference Roosevelt/Hoover b/c Roosevelt inherited the Great Depression. He didn't blame Hoover and call it a day - he made changes. Granted, many would argue those changes turned into disasters years later - but he did something and things didn't get worse immediately. In my opinion, with any luck he'll be out in 2012 and somehow the damage that he's done can be corrected - it's going to a long road just for this country to back to a mess.
I don’t see how he’s seen as the MOST at odds with the American public than anyone, because even the most right slanted poll I’ve read said 48% of the American public would vote for him again, 46% wouldn’t and the rest were undecided. I think the most important comment J.A. made was that it will be a long road back and we all need to recognize one term isn’t changing anything.
K.K.A. - Let's hope to God he is gone in 2012.
Jon Hopper – J.A., while I contend there was one president who didn't inherit a mess (hint: GWB), I think you're missing the point. All Obama's "changes" are long term, but our selfish me, me, me, now, now, now society can't accept that.
K.K.A.- It comes down to what you believe in...Big government vs. small government. Lots of people don't believe in Obamas long term changes for this country...me included and it has nothing to do with me, me, me or now, now, now. I believe in small government and allowing the private sector to create jobs. How many people working in the private sector does it take to pay for one government employed? Quick story: I moved to CT and had to change my license. I went to the DMV and the place was empty. Literally me and one other guy. It took me 40 minutes and 4, yes I said 4, different government employees to hand me a license. Each 'station' I went to asked me to show my ID, they looked at my application, and then sent me to the next guy. One guy checked me in and gave me the correct app. The next guy made sure I had it filled out properly, the next took my money, and then the last guy checked my eyes and took my picture. All I can say is WTF. Four guys making probably 50k a year plus benefits....yeah...go big government!
I actually agree in small government over big government, but this is something we will never see again, because of all the people who have politicians in their pockets. My definition of small government is different however. To me small government is only possible if all of the people are taken care of. Some may say this is a contradiction, but if it’s understood what services are provided and everyone is truly equal, government can pretty much stay out of the way. As for the private sector creating jobs, not only does this not happen, but currently the exact opposite is happening. They are limiting staff, paying less and making more. They are profiting off of people’s fears, which is sick. People are now willing to take pay cuts to keep their jobs, because they know they can be replaced immediately.
Republicans say they want jobs created, but right here we see an example of someone who would be happy to have three jobs cut, so she could get about her day. I also laugh that it’s coming up on the tenth anniversary of 9/11 and people still haven’t become comfortable with the fact that paperwork takes longer, because they check everything. I for one can deal with an extra ten minutes. I also think it’s an exaggeration as I’ve been to both Yonkers and white Plains’ DMV in the past two year and neither visit took longer than a half hour and they were mobbed.
Jon Hopper So your 40 minutes is worth three people being unemployed? Thank you for perfectly illustrating what's wrong with this country!
J.A. - GWB didn't inherit a mess? C'mon...While I'm not a big fan of his either - you can't deny that the Al-Quaida grew to power right under Clinton's nose and when did they strike? During Bush's admin. That's one hell of a mess.
Clinton tried to kill him, but failed. Bush’s family has long time ties to the Bin Laden family, which is well documented, but for some reason, this is not recognized by anyone on the right.
Original poster - Sorry Hop, there is no way that I can look at this and say that it is OK to have 4 people do the job 1 can for the sake of keeping 3 others employed at my expense.
Why is it one’s expense? Do you really think that one person is going to work that much faster? Four times the work, for which definitely would not be four times the pay would leave me to believe one would be there for much more than an hour. Especially, since the way republican’s seem to run things, they people would be paid much less.
K.K.A. - Why is it my responsibility to pay for four people to have jobs that don't produce anything? It isn't the job of the government to create jobs. No private company would have four people do the job of one. Trust me on this: the majority of people who work at the DMV are there for a paycheck and nothing else. They didn't strive and work themselves through college to be a DMV employee. This wasn't their childhood dream. Oh and Hooper, I hope the next time you are sitting at the DMV for an hour and a half watching the employees chat about their weekend activities while your ass is sitting on a bench waiting for your number to be called, that you happily remember all of the jobs you are helping to support.
I wonder if KKA would feel the same way if she went to a restaurant and the same person who seated her, took her order, cooked the food and then cleaned up. It seems to me, technically, one person could do all these jobs, since none are truly being done at the same time. So our answer to unemployment is to make everyone overwork and hire less? It sounds like that is her solution. Any service you are paying someone’s paycheck. If you go and get your nails done, aren’t you paying their salary? This thought process has always baffled me.
Jon Hopper - So paying for college to collect Unemployment is better. Doesn't an overpaid, as you see it, government worker turn around and spend money, thus improving the economy? What amazes me is that the Right embraces Reagan's trickle-down effect, but nobody truly understands how it works. You can't complain about people looking for handouts and then turn around and complain about over hiring. And on a personal note, I know people who work for DMV and I'd guess they work a hell of a lot harder than the average office worker in the private sector.
K.K.A. - This all goes back to the original point: large versus small government. Clearly you believe that the government should create jobs just for the sake of creating jobs. And, your point is don't go to college (not that I believe everyone has to) and just wait for the government to come up with a way to get me a paycheck? Brilliant... I get the whole trickle-down effect. I just believe in letting that happen through the private sector.
J.A. the smaller the government the better
Jon Hopper I left a decent job to go back to school for Physical. Ed. I blew out my knee and the school screwed me. Being we live in a country without universal health care I couldn't get surgery. Then I blew out the second knee. The injuries have cost me three jobs and have limited my ability to find work. So I deserve to be thrown in the gutter because I’m "looking for a handout?
Jon Hopper J.A. I agree, but small should mean small and effective, not small for the sake of small
K.K.A. - I fully believe that there are people who really need help. But, the government doesn't create wealth. Only the private sector does. The only way we can pay government employees is through taxation. At some point there is a tipping point....hmm...doesn't that sound like the position we are in? Are we supposed to keep borrowing money from China to support our big government? Or, should we give tax breaks to small business and stop making it so hard for companies to do business in the US? Another quick story: my cousin’s father-in-law owns a company that manufactures electronics. He set up shop in China because he couldn't turn a profit if he manufactured in the US. So 1,200 Chinese workers are getting paid instead of 1,200 American workers. Because of our rules, regulations, and taxes on small business companies are forced to outsource to make money. You would think our government would realize this and make it desirable for small businesses to stay in the US. Instead they want to keep their hand in the cookie jar....and now 1,200 fewer jobs are available. Maybe even a job that you could do with your bad knees.
Now these are the comments that inspired me to start this blog. That paragraph, in a nutshell described the ugly face of American capitalism and what is wrong with republican thinking. Let’s not borrow money from China, because it puts us further in debt, but let’s open up a company with 1,200 employees, which I’d argue is far from a small business, being that small business is generally considered a company with less than 30 employees. Let’s make a huge profit, paying taxes in another country, employing their citizens and boosting their economy. The problem isn’t that a company like this can’t make a profit; it’s that they can’t make a huge profit. Nobody is moving their company to China to make an extra $100,000 a year. They are moving, because the standards are so low, they can pay their employees about eight cents on the dollar. I recently read an article about Nike, who pays Tiger Woods $10 million dollars a year to use their products. Apparently, that dollar amount will pay eleven hundred yearly salaries overseas. Yes, that’s how little they pay. That being said, if they cut Tiger’s pay in half, they could produce the same equipment within the United States and turn the exact same profit. So does the private sector create jobs exactly? It’s one thing to say something that sounds great, but it’s another to actually do it.
Obama promised change we could believe in. The Republican’s believe if it’s broke, it’ll fix itself. Sadly, we can’t believe in either’s story, because we know better. Well, half of us do.
Comments
Post a Comment