Obama Forward?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by usmcstinger, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. usmcstinger
    Offline

    usmcstinger Silver Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,064
    Thanks Received:
    197
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +251
    In my opinion. Obama wants to to change our Constitutional Republic to Democratic Socialism and continue his use of the Keynesian Economic System. This economic system surfaced circa 1930. The system is old and has never had a long term positive effect
    Why would a rational person use an old and flawed system?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,542
    Thanks Received:
    2,554
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,661
    No long term positive effect? What about the G.I. Bill? It was opposed by anti-Keynesians at the time, but proved to be a boon to America, fueling the post-war economic boom.
     
  3. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,756
    Thanks Received:
    1,287
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,904
    The most threatening issue is his willingness to rule by Presidential fiat, i.e., Executive Orders, in defiance of Congressional legislative authority. It is not unreasonable to imagine a situation where a Constitutional crisis might occur.
     
  4. Freemason9
    Offline

    Freemason9 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    2,477
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +458
    In my opinion, you are completely out of your mind. A nation of 310 million people needs to have some coherrent form of government; libertarianism only works for relatively small populations in resource-rich environments.
     
  5. asaratis
    Offline

    asaratis Uppity Senior Citizen Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    12,285
    Thanks Received:
    2,647
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Stockbridge
    Ratings:
    +4,469
    We do not need or want a mother government that administers all of our needs from cradle to grave. We certainly do not need any more government employees other than for a continuously trained and ready military.

    You could probably cut the government jobs in half and still have enough people that IF THEY WERE EFFICIENT could administer all of our needs and still have time for days off.

    A problem with "government jobs" is that they tend to be thought of as positions not subject to criticism or dismissal. Once you're hired, you won't be fired...no matter what you do (or don't do).

    Government jobs should be subject to performance based raises and dismissals...just like the private sector. The private sector is efficient because people understand one fact quite clearly....if they don't do well at their job, they will be replaced by someone who tries harder.


    Fuck big government and cushy featherbedding government jobs. Privatize most everything and production will increase.
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2012
  6. Moonglow
    Offline

    Moonglow Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    81,437
    Thanks Received:
    7,982
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    sw mizzouri
    Ratings:
    +29,296
    I will be ready for the refund stimulus program on the fire in Congress to deal with the fiscal cliff.
     
  7. OKTexas
    Offline

    OKTexas New Life Member of the NRA 12/15 Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    23,959
    Thanks Received:
    3,732
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Near Magnolia, TX
    Ratings:
    +11,132
    Define "some coherrent form of government". Pleas share your vision of a coherrent form of government. Pleas don't throw out a bunch of talking points, be specific.
     
  8. jwoodie
    Offline

    jwoodie Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2012
    Messages:
    8,756
    Thanks Received:
    1,287
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +3,904
    The Founders understood the danger of turning over government to the mob. Too bad we have forgotten that wisdom.
     
  9. Freemason9
    Offline

    Freemason9 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    2,477
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +458
    This definition would vary from person, depending upon individual circumstances; i.e. some rancher in Wyoming would have a completely different set of needs and wants than a woman in Seattle. Somehow, that concept seems alien to many Americans today. ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.

    Personally, my "coherrent" government would not come after me to support its squabbles and wars with nations on the other side of the globe ($750 billion annual military budget, several conflicts always going on). On the other hand, "my" government would only exist to serve me and my fellow citizens. You might call that socialism; I refer to it as a properly-managed government. A government should only engage in activities that benefit its citizens. When it threatens its citizens, it's time to assess it.
     
  10. konradv
    Offline

    konradv Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2010
    Messages:
    22,542
    Thanks Received:
    2,554
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Baltimore
    Ratings:
    +5,661
    Isn't presidential fiat the antithesis of mob rule? Which side are you arguing here? :eusa_eh:
     

Share This Page