political thoughts - read at own peril!

[TX82FIAT]

don- again, very well said.

“I am only one, but I am one.
I cannot do everything,
but I can do something.
And I will not let what I cannot do
interfere with what I can do.”
-Edward Everett Hale

[bobplyler]

Patrick McGoohan as the Prisoner:
"I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. I resign. "

[DUCeditor]

Patrick McGoohan as the Prisoner:
"I will not make any deals with you. I've resigned. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. I resign. "

Never saw the show (I don't own or watch a TV) but I like that philosophy!

-don

[bobplyler]

Never saw the show (I don't own or watch a TV) but I like that philosophy!

Heres the first episode http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuCCgQsyq8s

[TX82FIAT]

So I've been thinking about the Presidents speech last week and wanted to let it sink in before offering any thoughts. During a talk in Roanoke, Va., President Obama said "If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,” He said a lot more than that and I understand what he is saying with respect to everyone needing teachers, roads, and bridges. I think this President and many other Presidents make statements in short appealing sound bites to gain public favor. However, everyone has access to roads, teachers and bridges. If roads, teachers and bridges produced success then everyone would be successful. I’m not sure but based on many years of experience I’d say that people have various support networks (families, villages, coaches, teachers) and individual talents/drive that help determine success. At some point there is a confluence between experience, background, effort and ability that produces success. A doctor puts in a lot of time studying and interning. The medical student sacrifices much to become a doctor. An Olympic athlete has risen to that level of success because of his or her mental drive formed by experience/background as well as effort and talent. I suspect that athlete with that level of drive would still make it to practice if they had to drive on an older road. It is the same for a small business person. They work hard and put in a lot of hours to be successful.

Let’s change the argument. It is estimated that 66% of start up businesses fail to turn a profit. Using the presidents same logic, that is the Governments fault because they as individuals did not fail, they are victims of roads, bridges and teachers.

Yes, we need the underlying structure of an economy to have a tax base to fund the Government (local/state/federal) to build the roads and pay the teachers. Therefore, we need successful business people and wage earners to make money, spend money, pay taxes and fund the government. It is individual success in a free market that funds government allowing them to maintain the structural economic base. I will admit, I am confused by the President talking about firefighters, teachers and police when the funding for theses folks comes almost exclusively from state and local taxes. The President and federal government do not govern these folks. Yet, it is a nice sounding talking point that comes up in his speeches again and again. If you say something enough the people will perceive it as true. By making that connection I guess many people now think the federal Government or President have some influence on these local government decisions.

I think the President has it backwards. Our government was successful in the past because of the successes and self reliance of the people. If we lose the ability to be successful we will not be able to fund the Government and that will make it harder for future generations to attain the same level of success. I’m not a huge Romney fan but on this issue he is closer to the truth. Romney said. “I don’t want government to take credit for what the individuals of America accomplish.”

[RRoller123]

Back in 2001, I sat down with some of my fellow co-founders over a few beers and we estimated that the 5 startups we did created about 600 permanent jobs in total, all high paying and with full benefits. I don't say this to blow my own horn, although I am certainly proud of what the various teams accomplished, but it really, really, irritates me (I choose a polite word purposely) when I listen to the present POTUS speak. This fellow is completely clueless about economic principles and is certainly the most anti-business President in the history of the country. I cannot begin to to tell you how much I hope that he is solidly trounced in November. He may be a good family man and good father, but he is an utter failure as a leader.

[FulviaHF]

Sorry, but it's a fake argument--a useless chicken-and-egg question of individual entrepreneurship and the physical and legal infrastructure of society. Road and public schools and courts don't create successful businesses, but you can't create a business without them. Business pays for those institutions--absolutely right--but business didn't create them. Government did. Chicken and egg.

And it's an argument that Romney himself made in 2002 when he told our Olympic athletes "you didn't get here on your own". He told them that their individual achievement was inextricably linked to a social support structure: family and schools that supported them, and the institutions and governments that built the training facilities and venues. This isn't something novel for a politician or a business leader to say. There's just no controversy about this basic principle.

I've had my own business for 25 years, and I built it on 80-hour weeks for the first half dozen years. So, no, he government didn't build my business. But obviously government matters; it's simply not possible without it. And you guys believe that, too, or you wouldn't think the US was better for this than any other country in the world (at least I assume you do). Because if government doesn't matter, why are we better than China? It's not that we have better roads; it's not like they don't know hard work. It is because of our balance of entrepreneurship and government that we don't have to pay bribes to local party officials to get anything done. We depend on government to create a reasonably level legal playing field; without that you can't create businesses and you don't have the confidence necessary for investment. This is just non-controversial stuff. Obama believes it; Romney believes it.

So what really annoys me about the whole thing is the absolute dishonesty of it. Is this what our presidential campaigns have come down to? Selectively editing the videotape to make your opponent look like he's saying exactly the opposite of what he really said? Romney's not a fool; he knows what Obama really said--he repeated virtually the same thing himself at one of his rallies a couple days later. So he knows this argument he's making is a complete fraud. Yet he's willing to say it because he thinks it'll help him get elected. He'll say anything he thinks you want to hear, and he'll change any policy position that isn't polling well.

[aj81spider]

I've resisted joining this thread till now. However, if we are going to criticize the President we should actually use facts. Here's what he really said:

*****************
"I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together."

***************

That is somewhat different than what has been portrayed - and does reflect a recognition that hard work and initiative are required to be successful in starting a business. The claim that he is anti-business is also one that has some counter evidence http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... s-signed-/.

Finally, since I've weighed in - I think the very name ObamaCare is innaccurate. The system should really be called RomneyCare - since Mitt implemented it in Massachusetts first. At the risk of opening up the whole painful thread again, I will only say as someone who is living under RomneyCare in Massachusetts that I have not seen many negatives and I have seen a lot of positives from it.

When you argue about personal responsibility - shouldn't you be responsible for having adequate health insurance so that when you get sick or hurt you are not freeloading off the hospital system and driving costs up for those who do have insurance?

One of the ironies of the health care argument is that America has the most expensive health care system in the world, yet we do not have the most effective health care system (actually we are #37 http://thepatientfactor.com/canadian-he ... h-systems/). Despite that we are too arrogant to try to learn how others manage to deliver better health for less money.

I'll try not to weigh in again.

[TX82FIAT]

If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.

A.J. You make good points. However, the above confirmed quote does show a lack of business understanding. In a genius well presented form, it undermines personal accomplishment and drives a wedge between those struggling to put food on the table and those that have accomplished some degree of success.

IMO the president is a good man that is trying to do what he feels is best for the country. I can not debate the compasionate argument that we have free riders and the health care system needs to improve to provide for those that do not have coverage. However, I can disagree with the "pass this now" approach that was used. I have issue with elected officials voting on a country altering piece of legislation without reading and understanding the contents. I have issues with the deceptive "this is not a tax" approach when the IRS was the enforcement agent. This was a tax in substance all along and confirmed by the supreme court. This Bill in it's current form would have never been passed if it was disclosed and presented to the american people as a tax. Trqansparency does not seem to apply in many circumstances.

I have issue with the approach taken with respect to immigration and the current amnesty state that is being forced upon us. The redefining of an illegal alien and the present executive guidance that we will not deport verified illegals unless they have done something wrong. They entered our country illegally...that is something wrong. Why would anyone follow a legal path to citizenship when there are no consequences for illegal activity.

We passed welfare reform under President Clinton that reduced the abused in welfare and reduced welfare spending. It is a great example used earlier in this thred that the Goverment actually can reduce spending in an area. However, guidance from the executive branch is removing some of the work requirements. Why!

At the end of the day, the end does not justify the means. We must follow the laws on the books. No one is above the law including the President. The faith and confidence I put in the President last election has been eroded by his actions. I can not turn a blind eye to what I know to be correct any longer....

[RRoller123]

I think the recent POTUS quotes are merely the affirmation of what most of us have suspected for a long time, and that the media has spent almost 4 years covering up. He is a Collectivist and a Redistributionist. This is fine if one subscribes to these modes of government, but I think the majority of Americans do not, and they will hopefully say so in November. I think his comments were a rare moment of candor and honesty and this may have been his Waterloo.

[bobplyler]

"Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”"

Robert A. Heinlein

[RRoller123]

"Noted. Agreed. Proceed."

Robert Heinlein

[maytag]

I've resisted joining this thread till now. However, if we are going to criticize the President we should actually use facts. Here's what he really said:

The claim that he is anti-business is also one that has some counter evidence http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... s-signed-/.

When you argue about personal responsibility - shouldn't you be responsible for having adequate health insurance so that when you get sick or hurt you are not freeloading off the hospital system and driving costs up for those who do have insurance?

One of the ironies of the health care argument is that America has the most expensive health care system in the world, yet we do not have the most effective health care system (actually we are #37 http://thepatientfactor.com/canadian-he ... h-systems/). Despite that we are too arrogant to try to learn how others manage to deliver better health for less money.

I'll try not to weigh in again.

This seems a little disingenuous to me. You've entered the conversation purportedly because facts were not being presented. You are of course going to fix that, because you are the only one with the facts. And then you provide two links to some VERY political (and extremely biased) sites who have very clear agendas, and expect us to just accept them as facts.
And then you say you're back out of the conversation again. As if your work here is done? c'mon, you're gonna have to work harder than that. I don't even need to look at the "facts" you've linked to know what they say. I know EXACTLY what they'll say, because i know the agendas those sites are promoting, and that you are promoting in your post.

And to your comment (quoted above) in the middle of all of that, about personal responsibility... okay, I see what you meant to say. But without changing ANY of the words you used, listen to what you REALLY said: "shouldn't you be responsible for having adequate health insurance so that when you get sick or hurt you are not freeloading off the hospital system and driving costs up for those who do have insurance?"

exactly my / our argument for personal responsibility. it is OUR responsibility, personally, as individuals. it is NOT "our" responsibility, as a society or government's role to provide it, or force us to provide it for others who don't have it.

[FulviaHF]

I think the recent POTUS quotes are merely the affirmation of what most of us have suspected for a long time, and that the media has spent almost 4 years covering up. He is a Collectivist and a Redistributionist. This is fine if one subscribes to these modes of government, but I think the majority of Americans do not, and they will hopefully say so in November. I think his comments were a rare moment of candor and honesty and this may have been his Waterloo.

The majority of Americans support social security, medicare, and progressive taxation, all of which represent collectivism and redistribution of wealth.

[RRoller123]

(We all pay into SS and Medicare). It remains to be seen in November if the majority of Americans support forced redistribution, beyond what is necessary to maintain the common defense, a reasonable safety net, system of governance, etc. Time will tell. This election is probably the easiest one in decades to figure out. If you support our ongoing US transition into a European-style welfare state system, vote Democrat, if you don't, vote otherwise. November will be quite telling. We may become a euro-welfare state regardless, but it will be really interesting to see what the voters say. My personal opinion is that we passed the tipping point many years ago and that our fiscal failure as a society is inevitable, regardless of who is in office. $15 trillion now, probably $20 trillion debt in 4 years if he is re-elected. The only course of action that I can endorse is entirely defensive, from a fiscal standpoint. Right now, that is the Republicans, certainly not the Democrats. There is absolutely no hope of economic survival if we continue to leave them in power. We may fail with the Republicans too, but at least there is some small hope of fiscal sanity. There is absolutely none with the Obama, Pelosi and Reid crowd.