Am I the only one who is depressed about ALL of the current options for POTUS in 2012?

[Anonymous]

he's toast

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:Look, the problems are systemic no president, no system, no reform can fix them. We're in a decline.

That sounds like Perry - nothin' to do but pray on it. ( :

End the wars, cut the military by another third after that, and return the estate, cap gains, and income taxes just to Reagan era levels, and the budget is almost balanced for the next decade. Far from impossible, it's barely even unpleasant to 95% of people.

The systemic problems are campaign finance, a captive media, and the Senate - the economy is a pretty easy fix for a country as insanely rich as ours.

[Anonymous]

TheManWithAUsername wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look, the problems are systemic no president, no system, no reform can fix them. We're in a decline.

That sounds like Perry - nothin' to do but pray on it. ( :

End the wars, cut the military by another third after that, and return the estate, cap gains, and income taxes just to Reagan era levels, and the budget is almost balanced for the next decade. Far from impossible, it's barely even unpleasant to 95% of people.

The systemic problems are campaign finance, a captive media, and the Senate - the economy is a pretty easy fix for a country as insanely rich as ours.

In fairness to that poster, you are referring to the balanced budget. But I think they are referring to the long term economy, which are not the same.

I do think that there is little, short of massive long term deficit spending, that could change the course of the downturn. People need to work down their own debt before they will start to spend again. And until they spend, there is not much growth.

[Anonymous]

Best bet is to help get Pelosi back in charge of the House, then it won't matter when Obama loses.

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:In fairness to that poster, you are referring to the balanced budget. But I think they are referring to the long term economy, which are not the same.

I do think that there is little, short of massive long term deficit spending, that could change the course of the downturn. People need to work down their own debt before they will start to spend again. And until they spend, there is not much growth.

I referred to balancing the budget just as an easy marker. We could do much better than that - i.e., stimulate the economy significantly - with more smart taxation.

This country has been run by the fears of rich Republicrats ("They're gonna take my stuff!") for so long that we forget how insanely rich we are. There don't have to be multi-billionaires, and there don't have to be hordes of poor. Those things are closely related.

The objections to much more aggressive redistribution are usually: 1) Ayn Rand-type philosophical stuff; and 2) talk about disincentives. The first is essentially a religion. The second is just baloney - this ridiculous idea that a billionaire will stop working (and allegedly creating jobs) because his tax rate is 10% higher. For those guys, the dollars are just points on a scoreboard.

[TheManWithAUsername]

Anonymous wrote:Best bet is to help get Pelosi back in charge of the House, then it won't matter when Obama loses.

Unfortunately, there'd still be Reid. He's worse for the left than Obama.