Why I don't have high hopes for Obama

[ilia25]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

And that is a problem, because with Republican party so far in the la-la land, there is no one who can tell the truth to Americans.

The truth is that if we want to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat we have to rise taxes. The population is aging and new medical treatments and drugs are being invented that can prolong people lives -- but at a cost. So if we want our seniors to live in dignity and have access to modern healthcare, we have to spend a bigger share of our income to finance the social programs.

Another truth is that the advances in technology increase the inequality. The economy was growing in the past 30 years, but the middle class living standards stagnated because all additional economic output is being sent to the top earners. The rich see their living standards rising fast at the expense of the rest. That calls for more wealth redistribution, not less.

After all, the US economy was growing faster in 50s, when the top marginal taxes were at 91%.

Somebody has to tell this to American people, somebody has to challenge the voodoo orthodoxy that has been guiding the US economic policy since Reagan times. I may be wrong, but I have little hopes that Obama will ever become that person. He is just too slow and too timid.

 

[BallsBrunswick]

I retract my statement.

 

[OKTexas]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

And that is a problem, because with Republican party so far in the la-la land, there is no one who can tell the truth to Americans.

The truth is that if we want to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat we have to rise taxes. The population is aging and new medical treatments and drugs are being invented that can prolong people lives -- but at a cost. So if we want our seniors to live in dignity and have access to modern healthcare, we have to spend a bigger share of our income to finance the social programs.

Another truth is that the advances in technology increase the inequality. The economy was growing in the past 30 years, but the middle class living standards stagnated because all additional economic output is being sent to the top earners. The rich see their living standards rising fast at the expense of the rest. That calls for more wealth redistribution, not less.

After all, the US economy was growing faster in 50s, when the top marginal taxes were at 91%.

Somebody has to tell this to American people, somebody has to challenge the voodoo orthodoxy that has been guiding the US economic policy since Reagan times. I may be wrong, but I have little hopes that Obama will ever become that person. He is just too slow and too timid.

Tell me what the reasons are for the stagnation of middle class living standards? Your answer will tell me if your just ignorant or intellectually dishonest.

 

[ilia25]

Income inequality reflects the current level of technological and social development. Market always rewards valuable skills -- sometimes much more, sometimes only slightly more. We happen to live in times when market pays CEO 300 times the average salary. That calls for more income redistribution.

 

[GeoLaureate8]

Did you say raise taxes to provide funds for Social Security?

Get out. You don't understand what the Federal Reserve did to us. They robbed us and youre saying we should give them more tax dollars to blow off?

 

[tyroneweaver]

obama doesn't care about economics or the overall good for America.
He's an ideologue, and has an agenda to make us like Indonesia.

I bet he makes Jack Taylor forfeit his bball game cause it us just to unfair to score that many points.

 

[ilia25]

obama doesn't care about economics or the overall good for America.
He's an ideologue, and has an agenda to make us like Indonesia.

I bet he makes Jack Taylor forfeit his bball game cause it us just to unfair to score that many points.

Life is not a baseball game. A game is played to separate winners from losers.

But we live life for happiness.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

How many times have we heard THAT, before??!!!


*


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnoPpWdlG3A]Rachel Maddow (1) 111th Congress put policy before politics - YouTube[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBHK7zsz7xU]Rachel Maddow (2) 111th Congress put policy before politics - YouTube[/ame]

.

.

.

.

.

.

 

[WillowTree]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

And that is a problem, because with Republican party so far in the la-la land, there is no one who can tell the truth to Americans.The truth is that if we want to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat we have to rise taxes. The population is aging and new medical treatments and drugs are being invented that can prolong people lives -- but at a cost. So if we want our seniors to live in dignity and have access to modern healthcare, we have to spend a bigger share of our income to finance the social programs.

Another truth is that the advances in technology increase the inequality. The economy was growing in the past 30 years, but the middle class living standards stagnated because all additional economic output is being sent to the top earners. The rich see their living standards rising fast at the expense of the rest. That calls for more wealth redistribution, not less.

After all, the US economy was growing faster in 50s, when the top marginal taxes were at 91%.

Somebody has to tell this to American people, somebody has to challenge the voodoo orthodoxy that has been guiding the US economic policy since Reagan times. I may be wrong, but I have little hopes that Obama will ever become that person. He is just too slow and too timid.

Oh for fucks sake picklehead, americans knew obama was a liar and voted him into a second term americans deserve to be lied to so sit back and watch them get what's coming their way. and laugh right out loud.

 

[Katzndogz]

In the last 25 years the standard of living has been raised for EVERYONE. No one has seen their standard of living reduced. They have color tvs, air conditioning, microwaves, game consoles and at least one car. As far as standard of living goes, it might never have reached this level of equality of standards between rich and poor before. Now we're talking about degrees. It's the difference between a Chevy and a Ferrari, or an air conditioned, central heated, one bedroom apartment and a 27 room mansion. What we have is not an inequality over standards but envy over the 27 room mansion.

Poverty today is synonymous with squalor and filth which is entirely under the control of the person making the complaint.

 

[skipper]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

And that is a problem, because with Republican party so far in the la-la land, there is no one who can tell the truth to Americans.

The truth is that if we want to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat we have to rise taxes. The population is aging and new medical treatments and drugs are being invented that can prolong people lives -- but at a cost. So if we want our seniors to live in dignity and have access to modern healthcare, we have to spend a bigger share of our income to finance the social programs.

Another truth is that the advances in technology increase the inequality. The economy was growing in the past 30 years, but the middle class living standards stagnated because all additional economic output is being sent to the top earners. The rich see their living standards rising fast at the expense of the rest. That calls for more wealth redistribution, not less.

After all, the US economy was growing faster in 50s, when the top marginal taxes were at 91%.

Somebody has to tell this to American people, somebody has to challenge the voodoo orthodoxy that has been guiding the US economic policy since Reagan times. I may be wrong, but I have little hopes that Obama will ever become that person. He is just too slow and too timid.

I wouldn't say it's a sign of being slow and timid when trying to tailor bills that have a chance of getting something passed through that roadblock called Congress.

 

[ilia25]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

How many times have we heard THAT, before??!!!​

Hey, I'm not disputing that Obama and Democrats had achieved a lot, especially when they had controlled the Congress. Obamacare is a monumental achievement -- although it is very telling that Obama was unable to convince the majority of Americans that it was the right thing to do!

But Obama had zero success in educating Americans about taxes and entitlement programs. Worse, he sided with right wingers when he acknowledged that we spend too much on social programs, and that we must keep taxes low. He also sided with them on the issue of deficits, although it is clear that Republicans are only using that to insist on cutting social programs.

And it can't be explained by the Republican obstructionism. If anything, it called for more forceful communication -- Obama had to explain Americans what the issues are, and what is his stance, and why his opponents are wrong.​

 

[Clementine]

Obama is simply not a very bright person. He is unable to tell bad economic advice from a good one, much less to come up with good ideas on his own. He is in permanent state of confusion about the policy issues and that makes him overly cautious.

And that is a problem, because with Republican party so far in the la-la land, there is no one who can tell the truth to Americans.

The truth is that if we want to keep Social Security and Medicare afloat we have to rise taxes. The population is aging and new medical treatments and drugs are being invented that can prolong people lives -- but at a cost. So if we want our seniors to live in dignity and have access to modern healthcare, we have to spend a bigger share of our income to finance the social programs.

Another truth is that the advances in technology increase the inequality. The economy was growing in the past 30 years, but the middle class living standards stagnated because all additional economic output is being sent to the top earners. The rich see their living standards rising fast at the expense of the rest. That calls for more wealth redistribution, not less.

After all, the US economy was growing faster in 50s, when the top marginal taxes were at 91%.

Somebody has to tell this to American people, somebody has to challenge the voodoo orthodoxy that has been guiding the US economic policy since Reagan times. I may be wrong, but I have little hopes that Obama will ever become that person. He is just too slow and too timid.

Obamacare and free abortions will lessen the burden on social security. Now people are living well into their 90's, but with Obamacare, anyone 75 and older will not likely receive the lifesaving operations and treatment they do now. A panel will decide if any of us are worthy of saving. The senior citizens will always be last on the list of priorities and since there will be waiting lists, I don't hold out much hope for grandma and grandpa.

Social Security is a ponzi scheme anyway and, like most socialist policies, is unsustainable in the long run. The politicians hastened the ruin of SS when they got their grubby hands on the SS fund. Of course, any time politicians try to solve the very problems they created, disaster lies ahead.

Congress and the presidents, past and present, can take ALL the credit for what is wrong with this country. It is their misguided policies, greed, lust for power and foolishness that has created all the regulations that allowed things to happen. They cannot blame the private sector for following these screwed up laws. Of course, lawyers have played a big part by finding loopholes in the laws.

Wallstreet execs have gone back and forth from making big money in the private sector to enjoying appointed positions in Washington, where they help push for legislation that will aid them when they return to the private sector.

If you want to know why the playing field is uneven, look to Washington. It's all on them.

Now, in a feigned effort to correct this, the Obama administration is seeking social justice by redistribution of wealth. All they really need to do is get back to basics with common sense legislation that ensures equal opportunity. That is the sole job of government. The outcome is up to each individual and each should shape their lives by their own decisions, good and bad. Government cannot create prosperity by stealing from one side and giving to the other. If that worked, we would all have been wealthy long ago. Government merely prevents people from learning valuable life lessons when they act as a nanny to people. The lack of understanding about how to improve their lives, on their own, prevents them from rising above poverty and ensures a lifetime of government dependency. That ensures the election of nanny government and the destruction of prosperity. In the end, the very thing government claims they seek to eliminate becomes the result of their efforts. It's no accident. It's a tried and true tactic for taking any country down from within. Just ask Alinsky or Cloward and Piven.

 

[ilia25]

In the last 25 years the standard of living has been raised for EVERYONE. No one has seen their standard of living reduced. They have color tvs, air conditioning, microwaves, game consoles and at least one car.

And they had all that 25 years ago (may be except the microwaves). Look, I'm not disputing that the living standards might have raised a bit for low and middle income earners.

But the incomes of 1% grew hundreds percents! And no, it is not because they suddenly started to work harder than everyone else. The economy changed -- now market values a few star jobs (like those of executives, lawyers, some MDs, etc) much more than before, relative to the rest.

And there is nothing we can do about that, except leveling the outcomes a bit by taxing the rich.

 

[USNavyVet]

In the last 25 years the standard of living has been raised for EVERYONE. No one has seen their standard of living reduced. They have color tvs, air conditioning, microwaves, game consoles and at least one car.

And they had all that 25 years ago (may be except the microwaves). Look, I'm not disputing that the living standards might have raised a bit for low and middle income earners.

But the incomes of 1% grew hundreds percents! And no, it is not because they suddenly started to work harder than everyone else. The economy changed -- now market values a few star jobs (like those of executives, lawyers, some MDs, etc) much more than before, relative to the rest.

And there is nothing we can do about that, except leveling the outcomes a bit by taxing the rich.

You could try getting an education.

 

[Charles_Main]

Why I don't have high hopes for Obama

4 years of Track record.

 

[ilia25]

In the last 25 years the standard of living has been raised for EVERYONE. No one has seen their standard of living reduced. They have color tvs, air conditioning, microwaves, game consoles and at least one car.

And they had all that 25 years ago (may be except the microwaves). Look, I'm not disputing that the living standards might have raised a bit for low and middle income earners.

But the incomes of 1% grew hundreds percents! And no, it is not because they suddenly started to work harder than everyone else. The economy changed -- now market values a few star jobs (like those of executives, lawyers, some MDs, etc) much more than before, relative to the rest.

And there is nothing we can do about that, except leveling the outcomes a bit by taxing the rich.

You could try getting an education.

He-he, that was good

But seriously, more education for everyone is not the answer. Even if we make all Americans getting a college degree, it won't change a thing. There would be still very few star jobs out there, and someone else will have to do a $15/hour work, whether he has a Harvard diploma, or is a high-school dropout. And only a few lucky individuals would be picked for high-paying jobs, but instead of education something else will be a deciding factor.

 

[jwoodie]

Income inequality reflects the current level of technological and social development. Market always rewards valuable skills -- sometimes much more, sometimes only slightly more. We happen to live in times when market pays CEO 300 times the average salary. That calls for more income redistribution.

That is completely illogical. According to your theory it would have been better if Bill Gates had NOT founded Microsoft because of the ensuing income inequality. Also, nobody but you thinks raising the top FIT rates to 91% is a good idea. Wonder why?

 

[USNavyVet]

And they had all that 25 years ago (may be except the microwaves). Look, I'm not disputing that the living standards might have raised a bit for low and middle income earners.

But the incomes of 1% grew hundreds percents! And no, it is not because they suddenly started to work harder than everyone else. The economy changed -- now market values a few star jobs (like those of executives, lawyers, some MDs, etc) much more than before, relative to the rest.

And there is nothing we can do about that, except leveling the outcomes a bit by taxing the rich.

You could try getting an education.

He-he, that was good

But seriously, more education for everyone is not the answer. Even if we make all Americans getting a college degree, it won't change a thing. There would be still very few star jobs out there, and someone else will have to do a $15/hour work, whether he has a Harvard diploma, or is a high-school dropout. And only a few lucky individuals would be picked for high-paying jobs, but instead of education something else will be a deciding factor.

I was saying specifically for you to get an education. You seem upset that some people do better than you and you mentioned education so. Anyway.

The class warfare crap gets old.

 

[ilia25]

You could try getting an education.

He-he, that was good

But seriously, more education for everyone is not the answer. Even if we make all Americans getting a college degree, it won't change a thing. There would be still very few star jobs out there, and someone else will have to do a $15/hour work, whether he has a Harvard diploma, or is a high-school dropout. And only a few lucky individuals would be picked for high-paying jobs, but instead of education something else will be a deciding factor.

I was saying specifically for you to get an education. You seem upset that some people do better than you and you mentioned education so. Anyway.

Well, I gave you a chance to look smarter that you'll ever be, but you blew it. What a surprise.