OBAMA SETS OUT HIS PLAN - "WE," MEANS GOVERNMENT
Government, government and more government. In an address before a joint session of Congress, Obama spelled out his plan for his first year in office. While not a true State of the Union Address since Obama has only been in office a little over one month, as with all new Presidents he used the opportunity to present the laundry list for a new administration.
Throughout the address Obama used the word, "we," which is defined simply as government. His entire plan for America depends completely on total government involvement to solve problems, meet needs and boost the sagging economy. Increased spending above and beyond the recently passed 787 billion dollar spending package permeated throughout his address.
In fact he stated that the massive package was just the beginning of the spending he planned for this country. Another theme that drifted throughout the speech was ,"universal." Universal Health Care, Universal Education and Universal Welfare in the form of bailouts for nearly every sector of the economy.
According to Obama the only way to solve any problem is to spend our way out of it through borrowed money at tax payer expense. Nowhere was found any incentive for business and investment through the private sector or incentive for Americans to better themselves thought individual action. The only action Obama spoke of was either government action or government working with Americans. In other words, " the government will do it for you."
Obama mentioned the deficit he inherited, which was approximately 500 billion dollars. Since taking office he has increased that to over 1.5 trillion and climbing. In fact Obama has increased spending by 36 billion dollars a day since January 20. Then claims in the speech that he will cut the deficit in half by the end of his term. While not once mentioning cutting any programs he is creating.
Oh he talked about ,"wasteful," spending in the budget and how they were attempting to identify it, but no specifics about cuts just more spending. This can only mean that to decrease the deficit without significant cuts means raising taxes. He mentioned without specifically calling them the ,"Bush tax cuts," the rolling back of these taxes and claiming that it will only effect the upper 2% of income earners.
Bush cut tax rates across the board at all income levels. To eliminate these cuts would in actuality increase taxes for every wage earner in America as payroll tax rates would increase to the level they were before the Bush rate cut. Also Obama in speaking of increasing taxes said that he would only raise taxes on those making over 250 thousand dollars.
Again this is a false statement if he fully intends to cut the deficit without cutting spending, and in fact increasing spending. The figures do not and cannot match. If he only raises taxes to the upper 2% the increase will never match the purported decrease to cut any deficit. So if he truly plans on using tax increases to cut his ballooning deficit then it will not be long and it does not take a master mathematician to realize that the tax increases will continue down the line until they affect everyone.
Socialism at it worst was the true theme of Obama's address. Increased government involvement in all aspects of American life, government spending at unprecedented levels and all at tax payer expense to provide the funding to pay for Obama's agenda.
The comparisons to FDR abound throughout the media. Comparing Obama's message to the New Deal and FDR's spending to supposedly end the great Depression. Spending which now from a historical view has proven to have only prolonged the recovery. Had it not been for WWII the Depression would have continued even longer.
In like manner Obama is not presenting a plan for recovery but a massive spending and expansion of government that dwarfs FDR. When fully implemented it to will have similar results to the failures of the New Deal. Increased government with no real affect except creating dependency which never ends.
Ken Taylor
Throughout the address Obama used the word, "we," which is defined simply as government. His entire plan for America depends completely on total government involvement to solve problems, meet needs and boost the sagging economy. Increased spending above and beyond the recently passed 787 billion dollar spending package permeated throughout his address.
In fact he stated that the massive package was just the beginning of the spending he planned for this country. Another theme that drifted throughout the speech was ,"universal." Universal Health Care, Universal Education and Universal Welfare in the form of bailouts for nearly every sector of the economy.
According to Obama the only way to solve any problem is to spend our way out of it through borrowed money at tax payer expense. Nowhere was found any incentive for business and investment through the private sector or incentive for Americans to better themselves thought individual action. The only action Obama spoke of was either government action or government working with Americans. In other words, " the government will do it for you."
Obama mentioned the deficit he inherited, which was approximately 500 billion dollars. Since taking office he has increased that to over 1.5 trillion and climbing. In fact Obama has increased spending by 36 billion dollars a day since January 20. Then claims in the speech that he will cut the deficit in half by the end of his term. While not once mentioning cutting any programs he is creating.
Oh he talked about ,"wasteful," spending in the budget and how they were attempting to identify it, but no specifics about cuts just more spending. This can only mean that to decrease the deficit without significant cuts means raising taxes. He mentioned without specifically calling them the ,"Bush tax cuts," the rolling back of these taxes and claiming that it will only effect the upper 2% of income earners.
Bush cut tax rates across the board at all income levels. To eliminate these cuts would in actuality increase taxes for every wage earner in America as payroll tax rates would increase to the level they were before the Bush rate cut. Also Obama in speaking of increasing taxes said that he would only raise taxes on those making over 250 thousand dollars.
Again this is a false statement if he fully intends to cut the deficit without cutting spending, and in fact increasing spending. The figures do not and cannot match. If he only raises taxes to the upper 2% the increase will never match the purported decrease to cut any deficit. So if he truly plans on using tax increases to cut his ballooning deficit then it will not be long and it does not take a master mathematician to realize that the tax increases will continue down the line until they affect everyone.
Socialism at it worst was the true theme of Obama's address. Increased government involvement in all aspects of American life, government spending at unprecedented levels and all at tax payer expense to provide the funding to pay for Obama's agenda.
The comparisons to FDR abound throughout the media. Comparing Obama's message to the New Deal and FDR's spending to supposedly end the great Depression. Spending which now from a historical view has proven to have only prolonged the recovery. Had it not been for WWII the Depression would have continued even longer.
In like manner Obama is not presenting a plan for recovery but a massive spending and expansion of government that dwarfs FDR. When fully implemented it to will have similar results to the failures of the New Deal. Increased government with no real affect except creating dependency which never ends.
Ken Taylor
posted by The Liberal Lie The Conservative Truth | 8:22 AM
12 Comments:
I don't know what you are referring to. Who nationalized half the mortgages and the largest insurance company in the world? Bush.
Obama hasn't nationalized anything.
As for taxes, 90 percent of Americans got a tax cut with the stimulus bill. If you make less than $250K there will be no tax increase at all.
Where do you get your info? You think the Great Depression was not helped by FDR's spending programs? That is incredible. You need to do some reading on the subject.
Look up the unemployment and GDP figures around 1933 (before and after) and it becomes clear that government spending helped move the country out of Depression.
I am curious, how/why do you suspect it prolonged the Depression?
Rob - FDR Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau admitted the New Deal had failed. “We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work,” he declared in 1939. “We have never made good on our promises...I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started...And an enormous debt to boot!”
Unemployment just before the war was as high as it was when FDR took office. Sure there were temporary jobs for civil work but whet they ended they did nothin to spur the economy or create lasting jobs.
this is the same policy that Obama is using. It failed for FDR and it will fail for Obama.
I still don't know what your are talking about.
1. In 1933 when FDR took office unemployment was at 25 percent.
2. On December 7, 1941 the unemployment rate was about 8.5 percent.
So I have no idea why you think that unemployment was the same.
The onset of WWII led to pure Keynesian deficit spending - it led to a dramatic rise in government spending that finally shook off the remnants of the Great Depression and created the conditions for economic prosperity that allowed the nation to expand economically for decades.
The great thing about the current economic stimulus program is that we will see who is right. If Obama and the Dems are right - as I believe they are - then we will find ourselves with a more stable economy in two years and on the verge of economic expansion.
Republicans can sit on the sidelines, do nothing, and complain. If things don't improve then they will come back into power. If they root against a recovery but it does materialize, they will lose even more seats in Congress in 2010 and 2012 and will have to wait until 2016 to try to take back the White House.
If they want to call it a "spending bill" fine, at least that is honest. A "stimulus" bill is a lie. This is crap!
http://ci-report.blogspot.com/2009/02/oversight-stimulus-me-no-understand_16.html
Rob, in 1933 unemployment was 24%, during temp work from the New deal it dropped to 15% in 1937 and went back up to nearly 20% in 1939.
War production began in 1940 as Roosevelt shipped to Britain and that is what brought unemployment down. By Dec. 7 , 1941 the US had been in war production nearly twp years. So the war NOT the New Deal ended the depression.
The New Deal by many experst actually prolonged the Depression, not ended it as you are trying to say. Obama is using New Deal ideas in the same way and as it did then it will now also fail!
MDCons - by definition, stimulus is spending. The Keynesian approach to government is that when there is a down cycle the private sector seizes up and cuts spending. That is when the government is to come in and increase spending.
In 1940, unemployment had dropped to about 14 percent. Ken, your argument that war production moved the nation out of depression is fine but unemployment had already fallen by 10 percent over 7 years - a remarkable turnaround before war production.
On top of that, you are making the case for deficit stimulus spending. If your argument is that war production was good, then you must realize that it was deficit spending of money the nation did not have that got the nation's economy rolling. That is the Keynesian argument and it is what Obama is doing now.
Look, if you don't like the plan that is fine. But let's be honest about what it does. It cuts taxes on hard-working, middle class folks. And, it makes investments in the U.S. infrastructure - schools, roads, bridges, energy, etc. These benefits will be with us for decades.
You can hope that it fails, but just as Roosevelt did in 1934 and 1936, it is quite possible (likely in my opinion) that 2010 and 2012 will see economic improvement that will lead to greater Congressional majorities of Dems and reelection of Obama to a second term. The Republican Party will just further marginalize itself by being the Party of "No" and sitting on the sidelines casting aspersions rather than actually doing anything.
I see the socialist enabler Rob is hard at work.
Ken: Very astute of you to point out the "we."
It used to be "We the people" now it's we the government.
It used to be a government by the people and for the people. Now it's just government.
Ha ha ha ha ha. After the last eight years, in which Bush doubled the size of government, exploded the national debt, allowed the country to be bought up by foreign interests, and closed out his term with the socialization of half the mortgages in the country and the largest insurance company in the world, Mike calls me a "socialist enabler."
I don't even know what that is, but it certainly rings hollow.
Bush's bank bailout program was an utter disaster, but at least Obama's new stimulus package helps the average American worker and reinvests directly in the U.S.
Rob the problem with Keynesian theory is the government doesn't have any money to put into the economy. It has to take money from the ones it claims to help or go in debt for a period of time to again take the money from those it claims to help with interest.
These so called helps are short lived but long suffered.
Keynesian theories worked well to reduce skyrocketing unemployment during the Great Depression. It worked well to fund WWII production. It worked fine for Ronald Reagan's military buildup in the 1980s.
I'm not sure what example you will cite to say that the theory has failed us - ever.
Not to worry..Jindal has a plan.
Doesn't he?
Funny!
Post a Comment
<< Home