Okay, anyone disappointed in Obama so far?

[Anonymous]

Ok, I came from a former socilaist country. Basically the government providered everything, from birth to death. The only incentive to work hard was to get into a college. After that, the government would assign you a job, provided you a housing, not matter whether you work hard or not. At work most people would bring a big cup of tea/coeffe and a newspaper to read, because there was not much to do. The DC government employees should be very familiar with this kind of situation, except newspaper is changed to internet.

That said, I do believe that government should help the poor and unfortunate. But it should not be the solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are so RIGHT! I have so much respect for you!
I come from a former socialist country. The stupidity and naivety of people in this country (including these forums, and including all the "educated" people) is simply amazing! They look at the government to solve all the issues, when they are so fortunate to live in a country which gives (still!) so much opportunity. You just have to work hard. All they know is to complain and blame the government. As if it is a duty of any government to provide any uneducated, not very intelligent, and not hard working person, with a house, a car or two, as much food as he/she can have, etc. etc. They really deserve to be put in a collective farm. Maybe then they will appreciate what they had lost. Sad.

Sorry, I don't think the only choices are between 1) emulating the oppressive undemocratic country you left or 2) clinging to a system that has institutionalized a huge gap between the rich and the poor (and much more so than the majority of democratic industrialized nations). Assuming there are no other options is truly naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are so RIGHT! I have so much respect for you!
I come from a former socialist country. The stupidity and naivety of people in this country (including these forums, and including all the "educated" people) is simply amazing! They look at the government to solve all the issues, when they are so fortunate to live in a country which gives (still!) so much opportunity. You just have to work hard. All they know is to complain and blame the government. As if it is a duty of any government to provide any uneducated, not very intelligent, and not hard working person, with a house, a car or two, as much food as he/she can have, etc. etc. They really deserve to be put in a collective farm. Maybe then they will appreciate what they had lost. Sad.

Sorry, I don't think the only choices are between 1) emulating the oppressive undemocratic country you left or 2) clinging to a system that has institutionalized a huge gap between the rich and the poor (and much more so than the majority of democratic industrialized nations). Assuming there are no other options is truly naive.

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that. That was snotty. My apologies.

[Anonymous]

"I have told each member of my Cabinet as well as mayors and governors across the country that they will be held accountable by me and the American people for every dollar they spend. blah blah blah"

BUT...his own party leaders sent out a bill that NO ONE read the night before they voted on it...now we find out how much ridiculous spending is in there...horrible leadership from those who are SUPPOSED TO BE helping the American people.
I am not impressed, but had hoped to be...

[Anonymous]

I don't get it.

How do Republicans think "tax relief" is going to stimulate the economy, quickly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it.

How do Republicans think "tax relief" is going to stimulate the economy, quickly?

More money in your pocket means you can afford to spend more. More money in business' pockets mean they can hire more people. It's quite simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it.

How do Republicans think "tax relief" is going to stimulate the economy, quickly?

More money in your pocket means you can afford to spend more. More money in business' pockets mean they can hire more people. It's quite simple.

The issue is that they will not spend it. They will put it in the bank. Since the banks aren't lending, that doesn't do a heck of a lot of good.

[Anonymous]

PP here. I didn't mean to say they will spend none of it. Of course they will, but not enough to make it a good idea. I'm upset that tax relief is in the stimulus plan at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are so RIGHT! I have so much respect for you!
I come from a former socialist country. The stupidity and naivety of people in this country (including these forums, and including all the "educated" people) is simply amazing! They look at the government to solve all the issues, when they are so fortunate to live in a country which gives (still!) so much opportunity. You just have to work hard. All they know is to complain and blame the government. As if it is a duty of any government to provide any uneducated, not very intelligent, and not hard working person, with a house, a car or two, as much food as he/she can have, etc. etc. They really deserve to be put in a collective farm. Maybe then they will appreciate what they had lost. Sad.

Sorry, I don't think the only choices are between 1) emulating the oppressive undemocratic country you left or 2) clinging to a system that has institutionalized a huge gap between the rich and the poor (and much more so than the majority of democratic industrialized nations). Assuming there are no other options is truly naive.

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that. That was snotty. My apologies.

PP here of the quote you responded to. Yes, I agree, not seeing anything in between those two options would be naive, or more bluntly, stupid. The thing I was trying to say is that you Americans do not know what poverty means. Yes, yes, I know, if you drive in Kenwood and then in Sountheast DC, you will see a huge difference. But to see real poverty, you need to go out of the country. You know what real poverty is? When there are NO jobs, no matter how hard you try and no matter what you are prepared to do. NOTHING. That is not the case here. You can always do something to get by. Ask the Mexicans who jump the fence. If you really try hard, you can live with dignity, maybe not wealthy, but with dignity. That is the whole difference. And, by the way, not everyone has to be rich. And the gap is not that big here as you may think. The gap should not be made smaller by making rich poorer but the other way around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are so RIGHT! I have so much respect for you!
I come from a former socialist country. The stupidity and naivety of people in this country (including these forums, and including all the "educated" people) is simply amazing! They look at the government to solve all the issues, when they are so fortunate to live in a country which gives (still!) so much opportunity. You just have to work hard. All they know is to complain and blame the government. As if it is a duty of any government to provide any uneducated, not very intelligent, and not hard working person, with a house, a car or two, as much food as he/she can have, etc. etc. They really deserve to be put in a collective farm. Maybe then they will appreciate what they had lost. Sad.

Sorry, I don't think the only choices are between 1) emulating the oppressive undemocratic country you left or 2) clinging to a system that has institutionalized a huge gap between the rich and the poor (and much more so than the majority of democratic industrialized nations). Assuming there are no other options is truly naive.

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that. That was snotty. My apologies.

PP here of the quote you responded to. Yes, I agree, not seeing anything in between those two options would be naive, or more bluntly, stupid. The thing I was trying to say is that you Americans do not know what poverty means. Yes, yes, I know, if you drive in Kenwood and then in Sountheast DC, you will see a huge difference. But to see real poverty, you need to go out of the country. You know what real poverty is? When there are NO jobs, no matter how hard you try and no matter what you are prepared to do. NOTHING. That is not the case here. You can always do something to get by. Ask the Mexicans who jump the fence. If you really try hard, you can live with dignity, maybe not wealthy, but with dignity. That is the whole difference. And, by the way, not everyone has to be rich. And the gap is not that big here as you may think. The gap should not be made smaller by making rich poorer but the other way around.

Agreed - trying to bring everyone down to a common denominator by way of wealth redistribution is a huge disincentive.

[Anonymous]

But the income gap between the CEOs and the person on the factory floor is much wider in the US than it is Japan and Western Europe. I'm not comparing us to Mexico or former Soviet Socialist Republics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it.

How do Republicans think "tax relief" is going to stimulate the economy, quickly?

More money in your pocket means you can afford to spend more. More money in business' pockets mean they can hire more people. It's quite simple.

Or buy new computers or a copier, etc. Most small businesses put their surpluses into circulation - marketing, updating equipment, hiring, etc. I know once I meet my income needs as a small business owner I look for more ways to grow my business. When my income needs are stressed, I cut back on all of the above.

[Anonymous]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090309/ap_on_bi_ge/citigroup_bonuses

I thought Obama was going to watch our tax dollars. How stupid are we? Citi thinks none of us understand debits and credits? 3.5 m just wasted.

Tax relief can stimulate the economy. I now calculate estimates on how much more we will have to pay and spend less than that.....now it's about $1500 more just on local property taxes. Meanwhile our local government balks at increasing or instituting specific user fees for county and school items unrelated to public safety or health. Those areas are getting cuts in the budget.

Bush put in caps on % deductible for higher bracket charitable giving so people cut back there years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But the income gap between the CEOs and the person on the factory floor is much wider in the US than it is Japan and Western Europe. I'm not comparing us to Mexico or former Soviet Socialist Republics.

This might be true, I don't have those compensation facts at my fingers. However, comparing a CEO's pay to that of a working poor individual (school bus driver for example) who may not have a HS diploma and certainly no higher education is totally non-productive. And most of the "Rich" folks being bandied about in the rhetoric are not CEO's but two income couples earning 250K and up. Clearly they are not CEOs. I was taught "the market is the market" - if School Bus Drivers work for $15 an hour and there is no trouble staffing vacancies, that is the market. If CEO's find offers at 10M, then perhaps that is the market. Legislating what each should be paid flies in the face of a free market model.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the income gap between the CEOs and the person on the factory floor is much wider in the US than it is Japan and Western Europe. I'm not comparing us to Mexico or former Soviet Socialist Republics.

This might be true, I don't have those compensation facts at my fingers. However, comparing a CEO's pay to that of a working poor individual (school bus driver for example) who may not have a HS diploma and certainly no higher education is totally non-productive. And most of the "Rich" folks being bandied about in the rhetoric are not CEO's but two income couples earning 250K and up. Clearly they are not CEOs. I was taught "the market is the market" - if School Bus Drivers work for $15 an hour and there is no trouble staffing vacancies, that is the market. If CEO's find offers at 10M, then perhaps that is the market. Legislating what each should be paid flies in the face of a free market model.

I see your point, but I'm not talking about whether it is easy to hire school bus drivers for $15 an hour. I'm talking about the difference between the bottom and the top rungs in pay rates. What I'm comparing is the "gap." The gap is much larger in the US than it is in Western Europe and Japan. Unfortunately, I don't have the figures at hand but this is not controversial and it is widely accepted that this is the case, although there is debate as to how important it is. (Was able to find a couple of links about this but nothing comprehensive and easy to read right off the bat. Still, take a look at these:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1456723.stm
http://ezinearticles.com/?Factory-Floor-Management-System-Bridging-the-Executive-Pay-Gap&id=1859427)

I don't think that kind of inequality is good for a democratic society. Now it may be that you believe it would be acceptable or even preferable to maintain that kind of inequality. Fine. Just let's not pretend that it is something that happens naturally in advanced democratic industrialized nations. Other nations which have good standards of living and adequate civil rights have developed differently. As we have noted earlier, we are not limited to choosing between the US as it is now and the Soviet Union. As grateful as I am for not living in a Soviet-style republic, that doesn't mean I have to embrace the US system as it exists.