There is a major brouhaha over Rush Limbaugh, Obama taking him on, and the seeming vacuum in republican leadership.
Obama warned repubs off listening to Rush, Rush responded by explaining why he hopes Obama fails (he doesn't want socialism to be a successful answer), and then criticism and response over the lack of republican leadership in opposition.
As a small businessman, about 70% of whose business depends on capital leases I can tell you what the last 5-6 months have been like. A VACUUM. After Lehman Bros failure, it took three months for a client to get approved again.
It's said that small businessmen and women are the leaders in what makes America great. Entrepreneurs unafraid to take risks to make new capital and expand the pie. I'm not even getting that chance unless this gets fixed. News of more layoffs, watching deflationary pricing cycles on what I consider the KEY ITEM - flat screen tvs (we all want them and no one needs one), things like Pfizer buying Wyeth as they, Home Depot, and Starrbucks cut people, and CA seizing banks are not things getting fixed. They are crushing to the confidence of the american people if they continue unabated, and that confidence is the ticket out of this (unless we stumble into a REAL WAR....a la 1941)
I believe the vigilance of the american people will ensure that we do not become the EU, a moribund, drifting, hedonist looking society with a few busninessmen and serious people swamped with too much regulation, govt, and PC requirements to have optimism enough about their own future to have more kids than people dieing.
I believe we will REQUIRE a successful set of emergency measures to be temporary. In the coming years there WILL be large pressure to unburden govt ownership of items such as preferred bank stock. The govt has no business in business EXCEPT as the ultimate guarantor of the safety of the people..the job they were hired to do. We DO recognize the danger, and we ARE very watchful and concerned.
On the other hand the failure of what we are trying to fix will engender more and more extreme measures as the failures grow, and real panic ensues as the govt will become the only thing between a large % of people and homeless hunger. People will do a lot of things to avoid seeing their families in this condition.
So while I disagree with so much of what Obama is doing and will kick and scream over some of it, I hope that he is a very successful president, and I'll take my chances with a lot of people like me holding his feet to the fire.
Obama warned repubs off listening to Rush, Rush responded by explaining why he hopes Obama fails (he doesn't want socialism to be a successful answer), and then criticism and response over the lack of republican leadership in opposition.
As a small businessman, about 70% of whose business depends on capital leases I can tell you what the last 5-6 months have been like. A VACUUM. After Lehman Bros failure, it took three months for a client to get approved again.
It's said that small businessmen and women are the leaders in what makes America great. Entrepreneurs unafraid to take risks to make new capital and expand the pie. I'm not even getting that chance unless this gets fixed. News of more layoffs, watching deflationary pricing cycles on what I consider the KEY ITEM - flat screen tvs (we all want them and no one needs one), things like Pfizer buying Wyeth as they, Home Depot, and Starrbucks cut people, and CA seizing banks are not things getting fixed. They are crushing to the confidence of the american people if they continue unabated, and that confidence is the ticket out of this (unless we stumble into a REAL WAR....a la 1941)
I believe the vigilance of the american people will ensure that we do not become the EU, a moribund, drifting, hedonist looking society with a few busninessmen and serious people swamped with too much regulation, govt, and PC requirements to have optimism enough about their own future to have more kids than people dieing.
I believe we will REQUIRE a successful set of emergency measures to be temporary. In the coming years there WILL be large pressure to unburden govt ownership of items such as preferred bank stock. The govt has no business in business EXCEPT as the ultimate guarantor of the safety of the people..the job they were hired to do. We DO recognize the danger, and we ARE very watchful and concerned.
On the other hand the failure of what we are trying to fix will engender more and more extreme measures as the failures grow, and real panic ensues as the govt will become the only thing between a large % of people and homeless hunger. People will do a lot of things to avoid seeing their families in this condition.
So while I disagree with so much of what Obama is doing and will kick and scream over some of it, I hope that he is a very successful president, and I'll take my chances with a lot of people like me holding his feet to the fire.
So what measures would you recommend, specifically? Where do you think the bulk of the 850 billion should go? Do you like where he is sending it?
ReplyDeleteAny measures undertaken should be tied to LIBERAL FLOW OF CREDIT, and EXPANDING COMMERCE to INCREASE EMPLOYMENT.
ReplyDeletePrograms successful at that should have auto tie ins to increase their funding, and vice versa.
Those 2 items will rebuild the confidence of the american consumer and then nature will take its course
Everything else is corrupt.
So most of what I read about what this bill is means it's GOBBLEDYGOOK.
I want Obama to come to the correct conclusions, NOW.
I don't think we can wait 4 years for a Reaganesque/Goldwater type to come waltzing in.
I may oppose a bill, as I seem to be opposing almost all of what he is doing in foreign policy, but that's not saying I don't want him to succeed at his object.
We need Obama to do right. And we need it before this really gets serious.
I have watched 50" LCD's go from $3k to $1200, and there are still GOBS OF THEM - and I am sure there have been only minor changes in cost. Samsung, the largest LCD manu is closing 4 plants.
That is Trouble. All those folks getting laid off..think they are going to pay COBRA when they realize they have to pay 100% of the health expense instead of conserving cash for who knows how long? So who pays for that health care?
If we are not successful more and more burden will fall on the govt.
Epam
ReplyDeleteWhat you're saying is that we need Obama to let go of his socialist dream, recognize the facts and the steps necessary to restore confidence, and act on that. That would legitimately be success we would all commend. Trouble is, do we have any reason to believe he will do so? On the one hand, following the right course of action and allowing the economy to recover would earn him the admiration of most Americans. The question is, does he seek that kind of admiration? What are his ultimate goals? If he wants to consolidate power within a socialist state, he will not "succeed" in his own eyes or those of his leftist supporters by applying free market remedies to this mess. Does Obama have it in him to rise above his entrenched socialist perspective and make the right choices to allow his country's economy to recover?
Is that what he wants?
If he were to stand up and say, the measures we have proposed so far will not work and will only make matters worse. We are going to back off and let the free market do its job, I'd consider the man a hero. (I'd also hope he's got real good Secret Service people because all his Marxist friends would be out for his head.)
My understanding of economics is rudimentary at best so I depend on those who do know what the hell is going on to help me evaluate what is happening. Is there really any chance that the Obama administration will take the steps you describe? Because much as I'd love to see that succeed, I don't want Obama to "succeed" by force, intimidation, and manipulation. We would then start to equate bare survival with success and be forced to rely on the government for that survival because the alternative would be illegal.
I want to see Obama choose the right course, too. But at this point it doesn't look good. What sort of pressures could motivate him to turn in the right direction?
Epa,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, but I think you and Rush are saying the same thing.
The problem with Rush is he is contributing to an environment of agitation by demagoguery. He is saying he wants Obama to fail, and then he is specifying that what he means is he wants Obama's socialist policies to fail.
You yourself are admitting that Obama's plan, as it is currently constituted, is not likely to be successful. There is not a lot to it that likely to open up the flow of money RIGHT NOW. It is pork aimed at projects and programs which will take 12-18 months to kick in, as I understand it.
Perhaps I am not getting what you are saying.
Epa,
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I'm with you on this: We need Obama to be successful. We can not afford for him to fail.
And, that's why I think Rush's way of presenting himself if ridiculous. He's just doing it for ratings. It's not helping the American people. In that sense, he ought to be ashamed of himself.
Hey, I don't care if Obama appoints an economic recovery czar and calls him COMRADE STALIN if we get it all going.
ReplyDeleteThere is no way this nation is going to allow a long term socialist solution.
NOT GONNA HAPPEN
Pasto you are right.
Rush is an entertainer, after that is the message.
However if he is seen to be a force in making things go south, he will make himself insignificant, and enhance the Olberman-Maddow crowd.
Epa,
ReplyDeleteYou said:if he is seen to be a force in making things go south, he will make himself insignificant, and enhance the Olberman-Maddow crowd.
I say: Yep, and I think he is in danger of that at the moment.
Of course, his ditto-heads listen to anything he says, and believe it, and spout it to the end of the earth. But, it's jingoism, and this is not a time for jingoism. That's like children singing playground songs while someone just cracked their head open after falling off the swingset.
But, we're not fucking children.
well, I hope not anyway.
Epaminondas:
ReplyDeleteYou have such a negative view of the EU!
I would be the first to admit that there are many things wrong with it; there are many things wrong with most societies and systems. None is perfect. But the EU is not as moribund as you always seem to make out. In fact, there are a lot of wealthy people in the EU, and many successful businesses and corporations.
Take the German car industry. It is made up of wonderful companies such as Mercedes-Benz, Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, etc. Would that the American car industry had been as successful in recent years. Would that the British could have produced such wonderfully-engineered, elegant cars, too. Fact is that neither America nor Britain have been able to compete with the German car industry for decades.
The car industry is but one example of European excellence. There are many more.
Tell me, Epaminondas: Have you ever travelled in Europe? Do you get your information first-hand, or are you relying on the jaundiced press for your information?
Mark I am in medical research, cardiac physiology, I have traveled 150k to 200k actual miles per year since 1987, probably 50% in the EU, and I would guess if I could string my time together have spent about 2+ years total there (maybe more). Almost all in western europe. I have now stopped traveling.
ReplyDeleteMy time has been with Bayer, Rhone Poulenc, CIBA-GEIGY, Hoffman LaRoche, Wellcome Foundation, and I have especially spent a lot of time in the Toulouse - Castres area.
OK?
If what you say is true, VW would dominate here rather than Toyota/Nissan/Hyundai/Honda in that market, and while MB and BMW and Audi (which I have owned, and is STILL the best car I ever had..until my Nissan Titan) are great cars, they are not what the avg American will buy ..which is a Camry, or Civic etc. and now Hyundai Tucson's everywhere in the northeast.
The fact is that the very socialism we abhor FAVORS that kind of competition since national health care in europe and japan removes the burden of that overhead from the manufacturers.
The social burdens the EU places on individuals, especially those who want to build, invent, and keep for themselves the reward of their own brain, effort, etc. are in the words of a researcher in Basel.."STIFLING".
Their words. My observation. I don't mean to be harsh, really.
Europe is not the USA. We are different for a reason. This place is the repository for economic, religious and political refugees and is different for very strong reasons..primarily because people who could and did work hard had mobility and earnings difficulties where they came from.
Europe DOES have population replacement problems as we know. Why?
Why do you think?
A lot of people think of the 'west' as being all the same, but it's not even close.
I love Sweden, but it's really nothing like the USA
Epaminondas:
ReplyDeleteThank you for your excellent answer. So, obviously you speak from experience. I asked that question because I have known of Americans who have never left the shores of the US, yet they find it easy to criticise Europe. I am glad to know that you are well-informed about Europe.
By the way, we are all entitled to our opinions; and having differing ones, at least in my view, does not, should not mean that we cannot be accepting of the other. It would be a dull old world if we were all the same!
Now back to Europe...
I do not share the same viewpoint; though I do accept some of the things you say, since I see that they are true. The EU, for example, is inclined to be top heavy and overly bureaucratized. And I don't like that one little bit.
One of the problems we have in Europe now is that we have too many tiers of government. In Britain, for example, we have local government, regional government, national government, and government on the European level. The list goes on. So much government is not a good thing. It is far too costly, and it is inclined to stifle initiative.
Having said all that, there are things about life in Europe which are superior to life in America. (Shock, horror! You probably want to do me in for stating that! After all, it's heresy, isn't it?)
Okay, so cool down! Stop chomping at the bit! Please! Since I am also going to state the converse: There are many things in the US superior to things in Europe, too. It cuts both ways. Each side can learn something from the other.
There is much to be said for the healthcare provision in mainland Europe. It is far better than we have in the UK, and often much better than you have in the States. Yes, the States has centres of excellence in many places. But from my understanding, health provision is patchy, since so many people cannot afford healthcare at all. That is not a good thing; and it is nothing to be proud of as an American. Imagine getting to a certain age, being in dire need of healthcare, and not being able to afford it, or having to rely on charity for it. Dreadful! It is my opinion that a system could be devised that would allow Americans to avoid introducing a 'national health service' (which I wouldn't be in favour of), but still make provision for everyone.
Personally, I find that Americans can be too obsessed with dogma when it comes to capitalism. Capitalism is the best system that has yet been thought up, since it has brought prosperity to many, many people. But we should not forget that it has brought poverty to many, too, since in raw capitalism only the strongest survive. It is based on the law of the jungle.
That's why, in my opinion, there is such a thing as the golden middle way.
Margaret Thatcher* tried to bring in raw capitalism to the UK, and to a great extent she succeeded in doing so. Whilst I was a big fan of hers at the time, I can see now, upon reflection, that her politics was the economics of greed, which we are all paying the price of today.
In short, extremes are rarely the best solution.
*Margaret Thatcher was good for the UK at the time, since socialism had strangled the economy for years. The problem with Thatcherism came when she left office. John Major, her successor, and Tony Blair, Major's successor, continued with Thatcher's policies long after they should have been modified.
Mark, Actually... I miss the cheese, I miss a lot.
ReplyDeleteI also miss okonomiyaki, but that's another story.
Look capitalism IS why america achieved what it has. Greed is not capitalism. Capitalism is not the rule of the strong, but measured enlightened self interest, such as charity, and the recognition of forces which can ruin capitalism, including systemic lack of care those who truly need it.
If the data can be believed, after OBama's plans go thru, 50% of Americans will end up being completely reimbursed OR MORE for their payroll taxes and thus pay no tax.
But those who take risks will pay more.
WRONG. Killing the goose. The more rewards for the risk takers, (and I am NOT talking about financial instruments), the more jobs for those who need the security of a salary to sleep at night.
I have no idea where that places me, but I know that when the state introduces too much protection for those who SAY they need it, or for those who will VOTE for the state, the result 100% of the time is that the risk takers think...'why bother?' since the rewards no longer outweigh the risks (which is where I believe the EU is). That's why capitalism works.
It's HUMAN NATURE.
You are also right in that this blog is a GREAT world meeting place, and frankly allows the expression of very strong opinions without the aftertaste of rancor.
HOPE . . .good grief, not just a slogan. Sigh.
ReplyDeleteI didn't vote for him based on his associations, his lack of openness to his own background including his birthright, and his utter lack of performance (voting present) with what little experience he presented.
There is nothing - NOTHING - to "HOPE" for success in that recipe.
But that's just me. I don't listen to the news anymore. . . I certainly will not resort to "HOPE" that this administration knows what it's doing either. Barney Frank and his ilk should be strung up on Penn Ave.
As each new political move further left is exposed, I will fight this administration in whatever manner is available.
I'm with RUSH - f*K the Olberman-Maddow crowd.
HOPE CHANGE . . .BULLSHIT
HRW
Epaminondas:
ReplyDeleteMark, Actually... I miss the cheese, I miss a lot.
I also miss okonomiyaki, but that's another story.
I agree with you on the cheese; I have never tried okonomiyaki. One of these fine days, maybe.
Look capitalism IS why america achieved what it has.
I realise that. And I would be the last person on earth to decry the system. Believe me. But because of total deregulation, it spiralled out of control.
Greed is not capitalism.
No, it isn't. But the problem with capitalism today, as I see it, is this: Years ago, capitalism was tempered with strong religious belief, which meant that the greed factor was kept well under control.
Today, in much of the West, however, people have left religion on the side; so there is nothing to temper the greed that is within so many of us. In short, we have lost our moral anchors. That, in my opinion, is what kept capitalism "human'.
Capitalism is not the rule of the strong, but measured enlightened self interest, such as charity, and the recognition of forces which can ruin capitalism, including systemic lack of care those who truly need it.
Capitalism can be 'the rule of the strong"; though it doesn't necessarily have to be. But it's back to those moral anchors again.
If the data can be believed, after OBama's plans go thru, 50% of Americans will end up being completely reimbursed OR MORE for their payroll taxes and thus pay no tax.
But those who take risks will pay more.
WRONG. Killing the goose. The more rewards for the risk takers, (and I am NOT talking about financial instruments), the more jobs for those who need the security of a salary to sleep at night.
Oh, I agree. Obama is an out and out socialist, from what I can tell. His philosophy is 'tax and spend' and in a BIG way too! If that's not socialism, what is?
I have no idea where that places me, but I know that when the state introduces too much protection for those who SAY they need it, or for those who will VOTE for the state, the result 100% of the time is that the risk takers think...'why bother?' since the rewards no longer outweigh the risks (which is where I believe the EU is). That's why capitalism works.
I agree with you that if the state introduces too much protection that initiative will be stifled, and people will not be inclined to take risks.
However, in recent years, huge rewards have not been 'earned' for risk-taking, as they should be earned in a proper capitalist system; rather, they have been 'earned' by many people who have taken virtually no risks at all. Witness the investment bankers.
In years gone by, it was the Carnegies and the Rothschilds of this world that earned the huge bucks as a reward for risk-taking and as a reward for providing jobs for the people who needed them, but couldn't provide them for themselves. That sort of capitalism is the true form of capitalism. But what we have seen only recently is greedy investment bankers paying themselves HUGE bonuses 1.) when no risks have been taken, and 2.) when taxpayers' money has been used (the bail-out money) to pay the bonuses!
In the UK around Chritmastime, the government bailed out Goldman Sachs to the tune of about £7.4bn, then Goldman Sachs proceeded to pay their employees bonuses to the tune of about £6.4bn! I don't call that capitalism, I call that sheer GREED. After all, that was taxpayers' money (as Mrs Thatcher used to say: Governments don't have any money of their own); and the employees shouldn't have had bonuses, since they had not added value to the companies at all.
You are also right in that this blog is a GREAT world meeting place, and frankly allows the expression of very strong opinions without the aftertaste of rancor.
Yes, there's no need for rancour. Nobody has a monopoly on the truth. We can all learn from each other. The world would be a far better place if we did more of that!
Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteI didn't vote for him based on his associations, his lack of openness to his own background including his birthright, and his utter lack of performance (voting present) with what little experience he presented.
That's exactly why I wouldn't have voted for him, had I been an American with voting rights!