I think each party knows what needs to be done, but they also know that voters willing to live through the sacrifices are by far in the minority. It's like voting in a team captain from a team of individual "contributors" versus a team that plays as a team. The captain is elected based on how he will help the individual players increase the stats on their player's card... nobody seems to care what will happen in 10-20 years, because nobody plays that long... People aren't unemployed that long, in school that long, in need of grants that long, starting their businesses that long, expect to be disabled that long... etc... I remember running some stats a couple years ago... It's hard to do what's right when your main focus is just getting the votes and your team looks like: 12.8M unemployed, 14.8M unionized, 43M Seniors, 41M aged 18-30 plus all the people receiving social assistance. Knowing there are 240M eligible voters - extending unemployment, catering to the unions+seniors+youths and increasing social assistance is an easy way to win the favor of 125M people. Also understanding to set expectations at a 40%-55% turnout, and on top of that, as an ironic coincidence, the unemployed, the unionized, the seniors and the under 30 have the highest turnout percentages... doing the smart thing won't, I mean, CAN'T get you elected.
Sadly Waste, you are correct. What we need in the US is leadership and we haven't had any in a very long time. What needs to be done is that the giveaways have to be cut and the taxes have to go up. Noone wants to say the truth because the truth won't get them elected. Your comment about those on the take is so true. I have an RV and post on a number of RV Forums. On one of the forums I asked the question "Would you be willing to take a cut in your Social Security to save the system?" My choice of venue was based on the group being one that was either on SS or close to it and one that was better off financially than most. I got 525 comments to that question and only four people said they would take a cut. Sad, sad circumstances we find ourselves in. I worry for my kids and for their kids.
So you see, no one is going to help others on their own. The "better off financially than most" don't give a sh*t about regular people, so how else do we help them? Or do we just let them all fail and hope they don't decide to start taking from those "better off financially than most"? There's never going to be an easy answer, but there's got to be a middle ground, but the problem is getting 2 groups to decide on what that middle ground is without one side feeling like they gave in too much. It's a dangerous game that we allow ALL politicians to play with our lives. Re: Taxes. I find it odd that some folks don't mind having their taxes raised with no idea where the hell the money is going. So are you good with being taxed more, only to find out that that extra money went to aide the Afghanistan rebuild? I personally would rather my tax money go to an American in need than any other person. I would never make it in Politics because I could care less about foreign relations until our American Relations have been shored up. And for the record, I'm for Obamacare, or whatever other name people want to call it. Is there some things that should be tweaked, YES. But the possibility of Americans having healthcare is something I'd much rather pay for than another stupid ass war. Crunch the numbers on those 2 wars and I guarantee President Obama has not spent nearly as much on his Social Programs. Nor has his programs killed Americans in the process. Now when a candidate decides to pay military, public servants, teachers to the scale that they deserve, they will get my vote no matter what their race/sex/religious belief.
The point of my post was not that those who have won't help others. From my own experience the exact opposite is true. The tax returns that I see tend to show the opposite as those who would be described as conservatives tend to give freely to various charities while those who describe themselves as liberals tend to be the ones who do not share. It seems like a liberal is someone who thinks that only government can solve problems by spending massive amounts of money......other people's money! There are many social programs out there. Most of them were started by President Lyndon Johnson almost 50 years ago. Food stamps, Head Start, and many other programs. They all fell on the heading of Johnson's "War on Poverty." Now after 50 years and trillions of dollars what do we have? More people are in poverty than ever before. So why would we want to expand those programs when they have failed so miserably? My point about people not wanting to take cuts in Social Security is not based on people not wanting to share. It is based on entitlements. Entitlements are like a drug. Once you start taking them you can't stop. I saw one study that looked at the 2013 US Budget and said that if you completely shut down the government and only paid out entitlements we are still in a deficit. Now think about that. We close down the military and every part of government and we are still in a deficit. As a country we are in trouble. We are spending so much more than we are taking in. You cite Obamacare as a good program. It may be, but we can't afford it. What do we do when the money runs out? Which would you rather have, free cell phones now or no food later? What should be sacrificed, government health care or government housing? Sadly people will continue to vote for more giveaways as long as they are the recipient of those giveaways. It has been said that the American voter is stupid. I don't think that is the case. Stupidity is a condition, ignorance is a choice. We can ignore the realities but eventually we are going to have to face those realities. So my two questions to you are still the same.....Why are you going to vote for Obama? and What will we do when the money runs out?
slore, I hope you and I can meet up some time at TTR. We'll share a pop or two and settle all the problems of the world. Peace, My Friend. Have a good weekend!
My reference is to the Twini-Slore conversation: med professionals and hospitals breathed a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court did not kill Obamacare, because the benefits were already beginning to appear, and stability in policy was important to forward planning. It's the Republican party and their followers who are still beating the drum for repeal, and this is already beginning to lose appeal as the cost savings and protections of the chronically ill and otherwise uninsurable are beginning to appear.
No matter Democrat or Republican how will the US recover? Raising taxes? Eliminate welfare? What about raise import fees, VAT, taxes, etc. for imported products just like other countries have done? What would US companies that are operating in other countries do if it were actually cheaper to manufacture or provide service in the US vs operating in other countries? What if they were given a tax break to do so? How many American jobs would be created? Just a thought. How many countries does USAID operate in? How much US money is granted to each location per year? What other US funded organizations does the US fund in other countries and what amounts? Why do we take care of countries without taking care of our own? Just another thought. There are so many issues out there that one could go on and on I know. But regardless of Democrat or Republican what do you really think is going to pull the US out of the recession? I'm curious to hear other thoughts or ideas.
You asked some good questions, I think. The U.S., with its roughly 300 million people exported 1.511 billion dollars in goods and commodities in 2011, with Germany close behind. China, with its 1,300 million people exported just slightly more than either, $1.898 billion. I don't think it's actually that widely understood just what a massive exporting nation we are, since all the attention is directed to China. When I ride to Isla Mujeres on a modern, airconditioned fast catamaran ferry, which runs every thirty minutes, all day, I do so on a U.S. manufactured product. Goods flow in both directions: I find U.S. produced produce in my supermarket in Mexico, for example, and U.S. manufactured home appliances as well, eventhough similar products are made here, in Mexico. My Frigidaire washer/dryer, made in the U.S.A., was cheaper than its Mexican manufactured counterpart. As for where things are manufactured, all the big companies set up operations in every country in which they have a big market for their products. So, Japanese cars are made in both the U.S., and Mexico, and sold in both. American cars are produced in China, and are popular there. So far, no Chinese car is made in the U.S., but when there is an established market for them, they will move manufacturing there, too. The financial crisis of 2008 sucked massive amounts of money out of the economy, and it has yet to recover. When the housing market begins to pick up, so will the rest of the economy, and the good news is that there are the first signs appearing, now, of that happening, with both prices and sales of new homes beginning to pick up, according to what I've been reading. ________________ Articles have appeared in recent months which have called attention to the fact that Americans are now paying the lowest effective tax rates in modern times; yet, attitudes have changed, and people really have bought into the idea that we need to cut taxes even further, and cut government services: the strains caused by these cuts are obvious to all, yet the hue and cry to reduce taxes and government spending even further continues to attract a following.
I think the only way the US can recover is for the American voter to accept the truth and work to resolve the issues. Both candidates are singing to their own choirs and Romney is just now beginning to mention the deficit as being an issue. I hope it does get more play but the question remains, can the American voter take the truth? I think there are a number of ways to ease into a correction of the past mistakes. One would be a gradual expense reduction and tax increase. Let's say a 1% on both counts. The tax increases that are about to be instituted with Obamacare are more than 1% and it shouldn't be that hard to cut expenses by 1%. Another idea that I had that I think might work would be if companies that operate in foreign countries had to pay US Social Security and Medicare taxes on those wages. This could enhance both entitlement programs and help to level the field with companies that have strictly US payrolls. The VAT is something that I really oppose. The VAT seems like a great idea for a revenue raiser, but it becomes a blank check for the politicians. If you doubt that, look at the historical sales tax rates in your respective states. I'm not crazy about either candidate and this campaign is really out of hand with the name calling, innuendo, and just plain lies on both sides. I have to look at Romney as the lesser of the evils and a guy who might give us a glimmer of hope of getting out of this.
