After listening to so many right wingers, ready to blame Obama for everything wrong from before he won the election, I thought it was important to put down baseline statements about the country's current problems-- all of which he inherited-- some due to the last administration and Congress. Here are two articles on this subject, and they are a good place to start:Obama inherited a fiscal disaster. Now what? Christian Science Monitor
Obama to inherit an international mess-- Politico
Obama to inherit an international mess-- Politico
There are many more articles, but these give the general idea. The world and our country have problems that our generation has never seen and which may require solutions with which we are not comfortable nor familiar. Can we think outside the box or have we been boxed into ways that no longer work? Are we willing to accept that what we have been told was wrong or even a lie? The answer to those questions will determine if we can meet the challenges of the 21st Century.
Obama's administration has inherited a US debt which currently requires 25% of our tax revenue just to pay the interest-- before the bail-out in the fall of 2008 or the Recovery Act of 2009. He inherited a citizenry who have been told they can have everything they want and not pay for it. This is a country used to borrowing money personally and nationally. Our last Vice-President (while in office) said such debt didn't matter. Does it? [China losing its taste for US debt?]
Want to know what China is right now doing with the profits our trade deficit and interest on the debt have been racking up? Buying up our companies. So when a company is in trouble, if it looks like they could use it, China buys it, sometimes dismantles, and sends it back to China-- bye bye jobs. Does this give you any idea of what is coming for us as a nation?
Unemployment, official unemployment, is now at 7.6% but that doesn't actually count all the people who have given up finding work or have been out of work too long to qualify for unemployment. That rate might be closer to 15% especially if you add in the underemployed.
Our schools are deteriorating and some this year will have to close early because of insufficient funds. Bush started a program entitled no-child left behind that was about tests-- tests the schools had to buy and administer. It wasn't so much about learning how to learn but learning how to take tests (not to mention making money for the test creators).
There was supposed to be federal money for this no-child-left-behind program but that promise was quickly forgotten. So now schools are into testing but not teaching. Think I am exaggerating? You will know I am not if you have children/grandchildren in the system. Some on the right would like to see the public education system disappear. They are doing what they can to see that happen.
We have a Social Security taxing system that was increased to build a surplus for future elderly. Instead it has been used to fund current spending. There will be nothing in the supposed trust fund when the time comes where more must go out than come in. This is called theft in most situations but not here.
We got a new entitlement program with Medicare for drugs that refused to allow the government to bargain for the lowest prices and instead was a windfall for the drug companies. It won't solve the problem of seniors in the very near future who are also prevented from buying their drugs from other countries where they might be cheaper. How exactly does that help anybody but drug companies?
Obama came into the presidency with a health care system where as a nation we pay more for health care than anywhere else in the world; and yet in comparison to many countries, we get poorer care. We have a system that is financially unregulated and the right resists any change or oversight.
Obama inherited a stock market that has been steadily going downhill if not crashing. People say they lost their savings. Well generally people did not lose their actual savings (unless they were invested in a company that went bankrupt). What most lost was what they were told they were making. They were promised sometimes 20% profits on their money. How could that make sense long term? I am sure a few got their money out and did get that much, but it was usually in tax deferred accounts where they had to pay a lot of tax on them and by the time you calculate in everything, how much were they making? Was that all a big shell game?
Then there is the housing market. Homes went up year after year and became a money maker as many saw them. Except what was their real value? Please don't say this hit us with no warning. We had been told for years that we had a real estate bubble with housing going up beyond its true value (whatever that is) Did anybody pay attention? Did anyone lose the actual value of their home, or is it the value they were told it was worth? Who made money on that bubble? Realtors, land developers, and bank managers?
Do I like bailing out banks, companies and individuals who did stupid or greedy things? You can bet not, but the question is one for which I don't have an answer. Are we tied to their fall?
I read a column this morning from Maureen Dowd where she discusses Bill Clinton saying Obama needs to be more cheerful. Uh does that mean lie to us about what's going on to make us feel better? We are used to it; is that what we expect?
What about the world where Obama now represents the United States? Well there is the obvious problem of terrorism and two active wars (Iraq and Afghanistan for those who forgot) but we also have Pakistan (where bin Laden can hide) dissolving into chaos with nuclear weapons. North Korea who has put its money into developing nukes and weapons that could strike the US. Add to this a world where many countries have turned more and more to violence. How bad is it today? Try this link: Bob Herbert on the rape of women in Congo.
Our borders to the south are porous and we have a constantly increasing (well maybe not so much with the job loss) stream of those who come here illegally, are not counted, and have no real stake in the good of this nation. This situation has led to an outlaw culture on the border made worse by Mexico on its way to becoming another country descending into chaos and violence.
Obama inherited a country with a reputation that its people are ruthless enough to use torture against all civilized accords-- used it when it is not proven it ever works, when it makes future trials impossible to determine real guilt. The world might have blamed the Bush administration for all of this but when he was re-elected in 2004, I think we took on this guilt for ourselves. Along with Obama, we also have responsibility for secret prisons, rendition, the right to override the Bill of Rights. Are we a people who worry more about flag pins and whether the Constitution is capitalized than whether it's followed?
He faces a military fighting in two wars and where the actual cost is only now being counted into the budget. Worse, with many who will need medical care for their whole lives and maybe being supported due to war injuries, he has a country with a rah rah attitude toward war but who have believed sticking a cheap yellow ribbon on their bumper should be their sole financial contribution to those wars.
Obama inherited a government that has learned signing statements and executive orders trump legitimate lawmaking. It has left the lawmakers (in both parties) often unwilling to take responsibility for doing anything about problems. He has to deal with two parties that neither one care about the best of the country but demand loyalty first and foremost to themselves, a corrupt lobbying system that gives lots of money to the government to get... ah oh yeah, they expect nothing back.
Obama has inherited leadership of a country that is divided in more and more ways. This blog alone proves how impossible it can be for the right and left to communicate. The facts can be the same but each side interprets it as they choose.
Here is a famous Reagan quote which both sides take out of context. "... government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem."
In context, President Reagan said: "In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem." furthermore he said, "Now, so there will be no misunderstanding, it's not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work--work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back. Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it."
Not many people (except maybe the extremes of either party) would disagree with what he said but neither political side generally uses that quote fully. I could easily cite a stream of current political examples, but it wouldn't do any good. Anytime I have tried, it's been like speaking different languages. What do we do with this division? Does it have to be a win/lose or is there some way to make the American people win?
So despite what we might think about Obama and whether he's doing things immediately to solve all these problems, just keep in mind the full situation his administration has inherited (and I didn't remotely list it all as there are global climate questions, environmental misuse, energy shortages, and on it goes)-- what we in this country and around the world have all inherited.
(The photo is of two hawks circling high in the air. When we first saw them, they were both lower but they moved up before we could get the camera out. As they circled, there were two possible explanations. [1.] one was driving the other from its territory. [2.] they were a mating pair. Are we open to considering either possibility or do we have our minds made up which is true?)
33 comments:
Rain, Americans love to assign blame-especially to a person whom they detest. Obama did not make this mess. And there is enough real blame to go around. However, at this perilous moment we should be pursueing solutions. :-)
I agree Paul. Maybe it's not even a blame situation as in no one group created it but instead a lack of reality for what the country actually can produce for its people. That a lot of people expect more than is really possible and the chickens have come home to roost. We have to accept a reevaluation of lifestyle. Frank Rich had a good piece this morning: What we don't know will hurt us. People don't want to accept (me included) that economically maybe the last years were the anomaly, not the real reality.
Watch how easy this is Rain:
I agree that "The One" inherited a mess.
Isn't that amazing?
That I can so easily admit you have made a point?
But what is most frustrating to me is your refusal to admit MY point...
That this whole mess was started by democrats with the "Community Reinvestment Act" during Carter's administration, and made much worse by Pres. Clinton trying to help people acquire housing they really couldn't afford.
That for the last two years of Chimpy Hitlerburton's administration DEMOCRATS were in control of congress, and therefore the nation's purse strings, and while promising they'd improve things actually made things MUCH WORSE.
Then explain to me how borrowing to pay off debts incurred by excessive borrowing will improve our present situation!
You made a great start by admitting our best economic years may be behind us, (including GWB's term.)
Restore my faith in your intellectual honesty, Rain...
Just follow my example above.
I promise... it'll make you feel SO much better!
(And will convince you might actually be reasonable.)
I do agree it was a mistake to let people buy homes they could not afford and with no down payment. There were many things done wrong by both political parties (the forcing of loaning to those who couldn't really afford a home was certainly part of that). The left has had some political philosophies that have made this all worse.
What gets me is how we really don't know what to think. We hear someone like Ron Paul say that if we do nothing, it'll turn around in one year. We hear economists who are respected say it's 5 years at the least if we do nothing. Who is right? How do we, the average people figure it out.
Many economists say we (and a lot of the world) are now facing a disaster. Are they right or is that just hype?
I did not like the bail out in the fall and said as much. I am not sure about this one as it depends on how the money is used. I also though would not like it if my bank failed and my savings and investments were no longer accessible to me as happened to people in the Great Depression.
If the borrowing is for real physical projects, then it might help but if it does not, we will be in worse shape. I have already said how little I trust Nancy Pelosi.
From what I have read, it might or might not work. Frankly I liked what Biden said even if Obama did not-- that it has a 30% chance of being wrong no matter what they do.
A lot of things that the left has done to supposedly help people has often only helped the power brokers and not those they claimed they want to help. How much money in social programs really helps the poor and how much goes to the bureaucracy set up to supposedly help them but instead pays salaries to someone else?
The Frank Rich link has a quote by financial planner with what might be coming in big cities with all these homes left vacant-- ghettos and violence are the key thoughts.
I was mulling over in my mind another blog. Like what would I do to help the health care issues? Boy, as you start thinking what could be done, you realize anything suggested will displease and hurt somebody.
By the way, I have felt you and I have been able to discuss a lot of this rationally-- even when we might disagree. As ingineer has said before here, I am not as far left as it might sound sometimes. Those in the middle, who lean one way or the other, we all hope something can make this better but boy I don't know. More borrowing doesn't seem good to me either as a solution.
I know one thing, our family has gone on a budget for the first time in many many years. That doesn't mean we were profligate but just that we didn't have to think can we afford to go out to dinner if we wanted. Even for us, and we are a long way from in financial trouble, but we are having to think about all this-- and we weren't among those who accrued debt or bought expensive toys during the lush years... thank goodness... Well we do have a farm to support and for anybody who thinks that makes money, they aren't informed on small farm economics today. It is satisfying emotionally to contribute to the food supply and know we are doing it responsibly but it is not a profit making venture...
Good post Rain. And here is another viewpoint from the vast Right Wing Conspiracy. There is a ton of blame to go around to both Democrats and Republicans. We need to quit bickering and work to not so much solve the economic problems but to keep them from getting too much worse. I agree with most financial type people that the economy will make a pretty good turn around in 2 to 3 years. And Obama will probably get credit for it just like he is getting credit for the bad times right now. But he needs to let the economy turn itself around. Not try to overpower it with and collapse it completely.
I think the Obama administration is fast learning what they can and cannot do. Their talk about nationalizing the banks sent the market into a tailspin on Friday. And even liberal commentators like Paul Krugman and others on CNBC are starting to rant about how the Obama and Pelosi and Frank and Reid ideas are going in the wrong direction and scary.
Oh and I agree with the context of Reagan's speech. I know that government is required, but an oppressive government will stifle innovation and economic progress.
And there is plenty of blame to go around on both sides. In addition to things mentioned here, during the Clinton presidency with support from both parties. The law the separated regular banks from investment banks that had been on the books since the Great Depression was abolished. This has resulted in a large portion of the Wall Street melt down. Now Bill Clinton is going around trying to say how everything is Bushes fault and trying to rewrite history about his role in this mess. But in reality Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and had 7 good economic years of his 8 in office. I agree the deficit under W. was horrendous and I disagree with that completely, but you do not see Bush 41 or 43 running around trying to blame everything on Clinton or Obama. But good old Bill cannot stay out of the spotlight and is still trying to build his legacy even if history does not back him up.
OK I read the Dowd piece after commenting. I am sure you will be shocked by this, but I like her article. Like I said earlier even the left is starting to question how far left the government is headed. It is what they have been saying that we need and now that we got it, they don't really want it.
Here's a novel idea : Let's all agree that Democrat and Republican politicos helped to get us in this mess. Remember WE elected them. That is the ones of us who took the time to vote. And then "experts" on Wall Street and the Federal government made some bad decisions that hurt us economically. Plus the fact that the rest of the world is catching up with us in a lot of areas. Remember civilizations rise and fall (I learned that in a Western Civilization class in college). Then add the American sense of entitlement - a good many Americans have their hand out and some of our young people do not want to work. Our educational system is suspect and science and math don't really occupy a place of importance in some folks view of things. And then a fair share of Americans think God is with us and indeed He may be, but He expects us to be responsible too. Lincoln and Reagan are moldering in their graves and we just survived GWB. Obama (at this time) is an unknown quantity. The future seems perilous but we can survive and thrive, but stop this infernal political bickering already ! Work on solutions that offer a real chance of success !!
To me, you are right on the quit worrying who got us here. The problem with solutions starts as soon as you try to figure out what they would be. I have done some thinking on it and there isn't going to be a way out of this without pain or so it seems to me.
As you said, cultures come and go. We rented the series, Guns, Germs and Steel, from Netflix. We had the book already. Not to say Diamond is right on everything but he brings up the ways various cultures failed or never grew to begin. It makes you think not only about what our government can do, but what about us as individuals
The best idea in these comments is stop blaming and start thinking of solutions. For one, recovery depends on individuals keeping watch over the use of government money spending. We have the tools to do so like never before. Thankfully we have a president who wants to listen. We need to communicate effectively.
We have a crisis and that means a time of great possibilities. Thankfully our president voiced this attitude. He is the first to admit that he can make mistakes and he will keep trying until he finds something that works. In addition to his creative problem solving, thankfully we have a president who believes in people overcoming odds.
The survival of any culture or nation depends on cooperation...People like Rush Limbaught can accuse and blame all that they choose, but they rarely come up with workable solutions to problems. Good ideas can come from a person of almost any political persuasion - history teaches that lesson.I think sometimes that there are people in our country who want Obama to fail just so they can say, "I told you so".
Paul you are right, a lot of the world is catching up with us in industry and military might and they are improving greatly on their standard of living. We will need to be innovative if we are to try to continue to grow and prosper. There are so many people in this country that think that they "deserve" something. Whether it be a house or an education or a job or food or health care they think they are entitled to something. People do not deserve a damn thing, they need to earn it and until more Americans start thinking that way again we are going to have trouble keeping our nation the most prosperous on earth.
And Rain I think one way to help get out of this mess is the let more Americans keep more of the money that they earn. Punishing me by taking my money away and giving it to somebody that does not want to be responsible for themselves is not going to solve this mess it is only going to prolong it. I might as well go down to Best Buy and purchase a Big Screen TV and give it to someone that has not got off their front porch in 2 years. That would do more to stimulate the economy than most of this spending bill is going to do.
I disagree, ingineer. You will buy a tv but you won't build a bridge, fix an airport or improve the school buildings. Who did you figured was going to pay for that if not the citizens who work.
IF you took the time to look at what is proposed for various states, it's on the ground work. A lot of what you would buy was made in China.
There is a fair tax rate and one that is excessive. It's unfair to take 80% of anybody's income which is what Reagan dealt with but it is also unfair to expect you don't have any responsibility for the years that built up this debt. As I recall you favored that war in Iraq. If you look at where our budget goes, you find a lot of it is not for the poor who you clearly resent and blame so much for this.
Is there a point where Republicans will stop saying the whole solution is in tax cuts and recognize that a country the size of ours has costs involved with keeping it safe and policing a lot of what someone else would do unfairly to either hurt or take what you earned. If we end up with this government going down, you might just find out what your taxes were supporting.
Obama did put a tax rebate and some cut into this because he had promised it and it was also what he hoped would encourage Republican support. We'll see what that does as it comes in April. We had one last year. Didn't seem to fix much, did it?
Taxes are not punishment. They are the price citizens pay for a responsible government. The problem has been irresponsibility but that does not mean no government is the answer. Reagan increased and decreased taxes btw. We were earning income at that time and felt the pinch when he stopped allowing credit card interest to be a deduction.
All children need good health care and education not just for their sake but for the sustainablitity of hope for our country. The children are our next page. We need to support higher education for training medical doctors and engineers and social understanding. We need creative thinkers who can put new ideas into production. Without the support of government and tax payers, the people who have the most money now will eventually find their worth was imaginary. The only way we are truely worth anything is when we ask what we can do for others and then put our good feelings for others into action.
There is anger about paying the way for people who are lazy with the belief that the poor are poor because they are lazy. That will change. We are now able to follow the stories of people much better than any time in the past. People are writing their recovery story. In writing and publishing their own personal story, a person becomes more responsible to themselves and society. Their writing is educating them. Plus the people who shelled out the money in taxes can read the stories and have a personal ownership in how their hard earned money is changing our society. What is happening now will be different from past administrations.
I always knew the war with Iraq did not have anything to do with 9/11 but once it was started I supported our troops and commander in chief. The world is a better place without Sadam and his sons. Was it worth the cost, maybe not? But that is the past now.
And how is it fair that somebody that makes $20k less than me gets a $400 tax credit but I do not or somebody that makes $10k less than me gets a tax credit for college expenses. My 2 kids that I paying for college (which is about to be 3) are not allowed the same chance to get an education? Why must we have a double standard? Why not make education more affordable for all Americans? Why not lower everyone’s taxes? Why not make everyone pay their fair share?
Why do we have to have 2 Americas? I thought we were all created equal.
And I was mostly tongue in cheek about the big screen TV. I have no problem spending my tax money on real infrastructure. But not feel good, do nothing BS like most of the spending bill is. There is only 4% of it going to highways. That does not sound like an infrastructure bill to me.
And I do not blame the poor for our problems. I was the poor once. I blame the political leaders that pander to the poor but really do little to help them get out of being poor because their power base requires that the poor vote for them.
And Parapluie I agree a good education is important. The public university system in California has had a great deal to do with our thriving economy over the last 100 plus years. It was nearly free and provided a good education, but in recent years the low cost part has been reserved for people of targeted minority groups and also it has been deemed that everyone should go to college even those that really should not be there. So we are spending vast amounts of money on remedial courses for people that should not be at the university and the folks that really want to be there and deserve to be there have a harder time getting in.
"Want to know what China is right now doing with the profits our trade deficit and interest on the debt have been racking up? Buying up our companies."
It's a little understood aspect of our trade deficit - that it's financed by a sell-off of American assets. The dollar flow in and out of the U.S. has to balance. Every dollar spent on foreign goods is returned in the form of a purchase of either treasurys, stocks or corporate bonds. And with foreign ownership comes control.
Our enormous trade deficit is rightly of growing concern to Americans. Since leading the global drive toward trade liberalization by signing the Global Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1947, America has been transformed from the wealthiest nation on earth - its preeminent industrial power - into a skid row bum, literally begging the rest of the world for cash to keep us afloat. It's a disgusting spectacle. Our cumulative trade deficit since 1976 exceeds $9.1 trillion. What will happen when those assets are depleted? Today's recession is just a preview of what's to come.
Why? The American work force is the most productive on earth. Our product quality, though it may have fallen short at one time, is now on a par with the Japanese. Our workers have labored tirelessly to improve our competitiveness. Yet our deficit continues to grow. Our median wages and net worth have declined for decades. Our debt has soared.
Clearly, there is something amiss with "free trade." The concept of free trade is rooted in Ricardo's principle of comparative advantage. In 1817 Ricardo hypothesized that every nation benefits when it trades what it makes best for products made best by other nations. On the surface, it seems to make sense. But is it possible that this theory is flawed in some way? Is there something that Ricardo didn't consider?
At this point, I should introduce myself. I am author of a book titled "Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America." My theory is that, as population density rises beyond some optimum level, per capita consumption begins to decline. This occurs because, as people are forced to crowd together and conserve space, it becomes ever more impractical to own many products. Falling per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.
This theory has huge ramifications for U.S. policy toward population management (especially immigration policy) and trade. The implications for population policy may be obvious, but why trade? It's because these effects of an excessive population density - rising unemployment and poverty - are actually imported when we attempt to engage in free trade in manufactured goods with a nation that is much more densely populated. Our economies combine. The work of manufacturing is spread evenly across the combined labor force. But, while the more densely populated nation gets free access to a healthy market, all we get in return is access to a market emaciated by over-crowding and low per capita consumption. The result is an automatic, irreversible trade deficit and loss of jobs, tantamount to economic suicide.
One need look no further than the U.S.'s trade data for proof of this effect. Using 2006 data, an in-depth analysis reveals that, of our top twenty per capita trade deficits in manufactured goods (the trade deficit divided by the population of the country in question), eighteen are with nations much more densely populated than our own. Even more revealing, if the nations of the world are divided equally around the median population density, the U.S. had a trade surplus in manufactured goods of $17 billion with the half of nations below the median population density. With the half above the median, we had a $480 billion deficit!
Our trade deficit with China is getting all of the attention these days. But, when expressed in per capita terms, our deficit with China in manufactured goods is rather unremarkable - nineteenth on the list. Our per capita deficit with other nations such as Japan, Germany, Mexico, Korea and others (all much more densely populated than the U.S.) is worse. My point is not that our deficit with China isn't a problem, but rather that it's exactly what we should have expected when we suddenly applied a trade policy that was a proven failure around the world to a country with one fifth of the world's population.
Ricardo's principle of comparative advantage is overly simplistic and flawed because it does not take into consideration this population density effect and what happens when two nations grossly disparate in population density attempt to trade freely in manufactured goods. While free trade in natural resources and free trade in manufactured goods between nations of roughly equal population density is indeed beneficial, just as Ricardo predicts, it’s a sure-fire loser when attempting to trade freely in manufactured goods with a nation with an excessive population density.
If you‘re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, then I invite you to visit either of my web sites at OpenWindowPublishingCo.com or PeteMurphy.wordpress.com where you can read the preface, join in the blog discussion and, of course, buy the book if you like. (It's also available at Amazon.com.)
Please forgive me for the somewhat spammish nature of the previous paragraph, but I don't know how else to inject this new theory into the debate about trade without drawing attention to the book that explains the theory.
Pete Murphy
Author, "Five Short Blasts"
I am the author of-actually I am a poet, but I am concerned about the state of our country. I am for dialogue and common sense in foreign affairs and bipartisanship in our governmental affairs. I support our troops who are in harm's way. My grand mother (a fine old mountain lady) said in her own inimitable way, "The world don't owe you a living." I agree . Nations like China, Japan and Russia are using tecniques we developed to surpass us in some cases. Our "experts" do not seem to get it in many cases. The average human being wants food,shelter and a better life for his,or her, progeny. It's not rocket science . Wake up America ! Forget greed and partisan politics that have wounded us for years !
The birds may be just riding a thermal - for the hell of it, because it's there, because they can.
Thank you for adding to the trade discussion, Pete Murphy. It is not spam to me when it is about a book that relates to the discussion and it sounds like yours presents solid ideas that our country needs to take seriously if we want to preserve any kind of quality life for our middle class.
I agree with something you said also, ingineer. Education should not be only for the wealthy or the poor. A lot of the programs for getting the poor to college have been as failed as the getting them a home they hadn't worked for and weren't working to keep up.
Education should have a reasonable cost but not one that the average citizen cannot afford. It wasn't always like it has become, and we can change it. Colleges used to be more about teaching than getting grants from industry. Most of the classes were taught by citizens, sometimes students earning their way through college (it is how Farm Boss paid for his education). It has gotten badly distorted and the end result is more and more from the middle cannot afford a higher educations. It's wrong. Higher education should be for those who worked hard in high school and are most likely to succeed both in the classwork and hopefully with jobs that benefit themselves and the economy afterward. Somehow the middle got shoved aside. It's wrong and it's hurt our middle class badly.
And yes, Barbara-- a third option to what that could be. We felt they had some connection because when we first saw them they were quite close and still circling. Very cool to see, but in that photo, it could be as you said.
This has been one of the most rewarding comment sections I have had here-- and there have been a lot of good ones. It really added to the original idea and is the kind of thinking that needs to go on in this country-- a dialogue on what's gone wrong and how do we fix it now? We may never get the life back the way we knew it but improving life is about being open to admitting it is not working and then ideas that maybe aren't appealing but will work.
One thing Americans have come to expect- in all levels-- is something easy as a solution. Sometimes there is no easy answer and only a hard one will fix the problem. People might be more willing to hear that now. Maybe.
oh and congratulations to you and your wife on the future edition, ingineer :)
oh and a lot of the money for highway projects is going to the state allocations. I don't know what California asked for, but here is their link-- CA. Change the initial to get other states. Each state was asked for a list of shovel ready projects. Bernie sent it to me.
Ingineer,
I just returned from a trip to Chile where in the 60's, people were shipped out to sea and drownd by the thousands because they did not agree with their government. I think our freedom here is of great value and dissagreement among citizens is healthy. The difference between The settlement of the United States and Chile is the United States had Westward expansion into a frontier. Our frontier life taught us to work together helping our neighbors raise barns. Today we can't have the physical contact of actually raising barns but need to raise our neighbors dreams and hopes with the impersonal replica of our helpfulness in the way of taxes. We need to be invested in the education of all our young citizens.
I tend to agree with you that higher education at the college levels has declined at the one University that I am aware of in our community. And the problem started in the elementary schools where children were not given basic skills. For one of my daughters with a learning problem but intelligent, she waited until she was in a community college to gain basic skills. Her problem might have come from childhood health issues not properly managed by our doctors. Lucky for her, she was able to out grow the effects of her early illness with proper education.
Pete Murphy,
You are very relevent here and far from being spam. I look forward to learnign more about your economic theory before making any judgement.
You have who you have and going into this election both parties new that they were in for what is most likely the worst administration in history. As Obama says everyone needs to pull together, work together and start turning everything around. That man is in for an extremely rough ride but I'm willing to bet, given the chance he will begin to set things right. In his own words, it won't be quick nor a quick fix. Being a Canadian we hear U.S. news everyday as we have all of your major networks. As it has been said here for many, many years, when the U.S. sneezes we catch pneumonia. I for one wish the press would settle down and leave things be. It would be interesting to see how things might or could start changing for the better.
Sandy (won't identify my blogger login info.)
Sandy-
Our press failed to vet Obama while he was a candidate. Their "Chimpy McHitlerburton" coverage of George Bush and failure to report negative news about Obama kept many of our own citizens, not to mention the rest of the world, in the dark about his lack of experience. As the video shows, they also didn't inform the electorate very well about his opposition.
"Canada catches pneumonia"?
I apologize...
But I didn't vote for him.
The right has as many nuts who believe everything they read or who vote on reasons that have nothing to do with governing. Why did Palin appeal to the right wing? Her great experience as a mayor where she left the city after her 10 years in huge debt? Her two years as a governor where she looked successful due to windfall taxes and high gasoline taxes in Alaska which funds their low tax rate but the rest of us pay?
Anybody who says that Obama didn't have enough experience (like Bush did?) and still supported Palin doesn't mean what they are saying. Really what they are trying to do is imply there were secret crimes, which neither the Clintons nor McCain could find but were there. They probably think he was born in Kenya like Alan Keyes who is suggesting the military overthrow him now. I really find it amazing that Keyes is not being denounced even by the extreme right but evidently treason is okay when it's from the right?
Obama had a real paying job as a teacher in a university and then 10 years of state government experience before he was elected senator and began a run for the presidency which most people would say was well done. Will he do a good job? Why don't we give it more than a month to see how this all turns out?
And glad you posted with effort, Sandy. Sandy is one of my friends and for some reason can't comment under her ID anymore but she does it anyway which I always appreciate.
Regardless of what the press "might not" have covered, you still have who you have. As for us catching pneumonia, it is a common quote. If your auto industry is down, employees are out of work, chances are, ours were out of work before them. That is just one example. We suffer economically when the U.S. does, not always, but quite often.
Sandy
(sorry, it will not let me login with my blogger id)
I have writen a short, short recovery story and submitted it at www.recovery.gov ! All thoughts ideas, problems are accepted. And as the recovery develops we are welcomed to come back to give more input. The website promises to review and show data on the comments. I doubt that mine will receive much attention, yet for me personally writing my "recovery" story in a few short paragraphs was uplifting. I wrote my plans like a personal contract on how I am going to cope mostly without government assistance. For I think it is most important to make sure that all children receive health care. For schools to be successful they must have children as healthy as they can be ready for learning. My grandchildren's success is my future as well as the future of the country.
Rain let me make this very clear. We are about to have 3 children in College. WE ARE NOT HAVING A NEW ADDITION TO THE FAMILY. Holy Cow I am having heart palpitations just from reading you saying it.
Rain . . .
You have said that you are not a Bush hater yet your recent blog is filled with venom. You can do better. The State of the Union address was so full of lies and Bush bashing that I and many others will no longer give Mr. Obama further honeymoon time. His speech broke the back. The idea that he and only he knows what is best for America is ridiculous. With the possible exception of Newt Gingrich years ago, I've never seen such a towering ego on display.
Nor have I heard a Presidential speech so obviously fail to inspire confidence in the future. Mr. Obama's scare tactics are beneath contempt. Who is advising him to throw trillions of dollars into the economy? With few, if any, directions or qualifications on it's use? Transparency? He told his Democratic dominated Congress to come up with a spending bill designed to prop up certain businesses. Instead they produced a 1000+ page document in fine print and demanded that it be ratified in 24 hours. The idiots actually passed the bill before anyone read it. He told them the sky would fall in if they didn't. No, it won't.
All economists and political think tanks do not agree that infusing money into the economy, saving banks that fail, purchasing poisoned debt from the banks, or saving private or public companies that fail, will solve our nation's financial trouble. Mr. Obama listens to no one. He expects friends and opponents to support his plans without complaint. This is no way to run the railroad.
Mr . Obama is a brilliant, charismatic, fully energized product of ultra liberal schools and the Chicago political machine. Despite his elevated IQ, he has actually had less experience managing people and governing than your favorite Sarah Palin. Yet here he is before he is dry behind the ears, making serious, fundamental, and radical changes in our national politics. Whoa!
And while going about his business of destroying America, he does not miss any opportunity to blame his predecessor for every mess in the world. He does so repeatedly without mentioning Bush by name. Take these examples:
"We will restore science to it's rightful place". Where has it been Mr. Obama?
"We are ready to lead once more". We haven't stopped leading the entire world since WW II.
"We can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders". Come on you idiot. Just exactly when were we indifferent? Not in your lifetime Mr. Obama.
Finally, "I think the American people are asking, do you just want to do nothing or do you want to do something". Give us a break. Americans are not asking that question at all. Only Mr. Obama is.
Dixon
Dixon, I won't comment on all of what you said here ecause it is your opinion and I believe is is good to air widely differing views. It is one of the values of a blog. For anyone reading this, I asked Dixon to post it here as I felt it's good people express what they think and am very aware of the huge gap in this country between the left and right.
On hate, I do not hate Bush the man, I do hate what he did to our country. There is a difference. One can hate what someone does and not hate the person. In the case of Obama, I had hoped that the righties would keep that thought in mind (they aren't) as when people turn their hate on the person, they often incite violence.
Sorry to lose you as a reader but you likely won't like future ones much better. I was hoping to leave politics alone. I am personally sick of it; but after listening to the extreme view from the conference the right has been having in DC, I won't be doing it.
They put up Jindal to express their opposing view of what should be done. Nothing. He couldn't even get through that simple of a project though without lying which is what I see in a lot of what those on the right most favor doing (not speaking of you but of the spokespeople). He lied about what he did in New Orleans after the flood. Why he didn't figure it would be found, I don't know but it was typical of what I hear from the right.
And now they want a revolution. They who claimed we should support our government even when we disagreed, when we were supposed to swallow losing an election in 2000 when the popular vote was won by millions and through fraud and the Supreme Court, it was handed to the right. We did though and when 9/11 came along, Bush had 80% support from the people in this country. It was something he used to launch a war, but we didn't call for any revolution even when he tortured, when he took away rights by signing statements.
Now with a legitimate victory of Obama, we on the left are supposed to sit here and listen to the right incite violence against him and try to block the ideas that WE voted for doing. Obama ran on everything he said in that speech. I am not fond of it all but who is with a political philosophy. I definitely didn't want him going into Afghanistan with more troops. I don't want 50,000 troops left in Iraq either. But in general everything he said the other night, was what he said he'd do. No surprises.
Incidentally, if you thought I was writing angrily in this blog, you should have read it before Farm Boss told me to take out a few things *s* You see I am really more angry at those who enabled Bush, who stood up for what he was doing when it was so wrong and often for no reason other than wanting a personal tax cut (which unless they make over $250,000 they will not only keep but get more which I also question the wisdom of-- that additional cut).
Believe me, I am as angry as you are and see it exactly the opposite. So sorry to see you not read here but I do understand how you feel. I can't stand to read right wing blogs right now.
Although I don't think of mine as being left wing, it probably is as I support many views the left has. I am not someone who is in lockstep with Obama but I also don't see anything he could do as anywhere near as damage to our country as what Republicans were able to do for the last 8 years.
The proof of the results of Republican control is in our current economic and international condition; and if you think that people don't want the government doing anything about it, where you read and your friends are all on the right and not losing their jobs.
It is a very difficult time in this country and I know from my friends that good people do see it diametrically opposed. I think we might be more divided today because of the media that stirs it all up to suit their own purposes.
Anyway sorry to see you not read my blog. I do warn ahead of time when it's political; so you might read my pagan stuff and skip the politics but then again, you might find that just as offensive *s*
And thanks for posting this. I do think it's good to have different views expressed. We all can get used to thinking what we hear the most is what everyone thinks because we form comfort groups.
Dixon,
Thank you for caring about our country enough to post your comments here. I appreciate your effort and emotional stress level in responding as you did.
I don't agree with all of Rain's ideas either.
I am more in agreement with President Obama than Rain. I see no surprises in the bill passed by congress. Obama's campaign positions were still on the web last I looked and can be compared with the stimulus package also on the web. Anyone familiar with his campaign philosophy can speed read the package and see that it is familiar. Everyday I read www.recovery.gov. I left one entry for the "My Recovery Story" about health care record keeping not going smoothly where it is already in effect. My doctor of 24 years is quiting her private practice because she can't adjust to computer recording. My next entry will be about inspiring us more to volunteer to assist government. At present I am collecting information on how my husband's fishing club's environmental projects in conjunction with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife actually help make more jobs in Oregon. My husband being a right winger who voted for Obama is angered by government hand outs. I am rather mystified as to how Obama will be able to cut the defecit while paying for universal health care, education and become less dependent on foreign oil. But I want him to succeed. My next project is to list all the products that are petroleum based and figure how to get by without them and substitute other natural products in our home.
The link for the 2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1enr.pdf
The link for Obama's campaign platform:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
These two documents are primary sources and great references for any discussion of our politics.
Post a Comment