Posts Tagged ‘government’
Tonight, in New Orleans, there’s sure to be a little song and dance as The Big Easy celebrates Fat Tuesday, the last day before the Lenten Season. As revelers prepare for the festivities, with the traditional wearing of masks and costumes, parades, and overeating, President Obama prepares to give the first State of the Union Address of his second term. But how different will things really be in the Capitol Building and the bayou?
During his speech, President Obama might wear the costume of bipartisanship. He often pays lip service to reaching across the aisle, but everyone in Washington knows what lies behind the mask: a man uninterested in compromise or building consensus with those who don’t share his extreme ideology.
He’ll likely display a parade of citizens who support his agenda. Whoever they are, however heartbreaking their situations may be, U.S. policy cannot be built on emotion; it must be rooted in the constitution and based on facts.
But the biggest part of President Obama’s speech tonight will be his plans for gluttonous government spending. Obama’s gobbling up your tax dollars. Like all people who “eat their feelings,” if he can have just a little bit more everything will be ok. The rich can afford it, so what’s the harm? After all, we need to “invest” in this, that and the other.
Doesn’t President Obama know that, since WWII, revenues from taxes have remained around 18% of GDP no matter the tax rates, while government spending as a percentage of GDP has sharply increased? Of course he does. But that doesn’t stop him, because after Obama’s Fat Tuesday, there is no Washington version of Lent. No time to forgo the excessive and extreme spending, compliments of the U.S. taxpayer. Try to remember that during tonight’s song and dance.
President Barack Obama spoke at a campaign event in Roanoke, Virginia on Saturday. It was a long and typical speech, but he wandered into some territory I haven’t heard from him before.
We know that he views the economy differently than most Americans – he clearly separates the private sector with the public sector. He truly believes that more government spending to hire more government workers is actually economic growth.
And this speech offers a little more insight into Obama’s outlook. The most stunning line was this: “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”
So for all of those hard-working folks who created a business, you really didn’t do anything.
Here is the section of the speech:
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. 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. (Applause.)
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. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
His notions of the economy would be funny, if the consequences of him winning a second term weren’t so dire.
Cows in Britain are killing people. Why is it that some of the weirdest news in the world comes from across the pond?
It occurs to me that England needs more cattle guards. Growing up in rural Arizona, cattle guards were a way of life. Just thinking about the familiar “thrrummpp” as you drove over them brings back memories of childhood.
And it reminds me of a classic government out-of-touch story, the veracity of which is in question because I’ve heard versions with different Administrations involved. As I remember it, under LBJ’s administration, someone at the Department of Agriculture decided to ask Arizona and New Mexico how many cattle guards they had. The folks on the ground, obviously perplexed by how they might actually count all of them reported back that there were many, many thousands of cattle guards. To which they were told that there were way too many people employed to guard cattle.
Old wives tale? Maybe, but believable.
This was passed on to me by a good friend, who knows how I feel about the auto bailouts, and that I give Ford a lot of credit for not taking government money.
Apparently, I’m not alone. This is a Rasmussen report:
46% More Likely To Buy Ford ‘Cause It Didn’t Get A Bailout
Public opposition to the auto bailouts may translating into consumer buying decisions, with 46% of Americans now saying they are more likely to buy a car from Ford because it did not take government money to stay in business. A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 13% say they are less likely to buy a Ford because the company didn’t receive a bailout, and 37% say it has no impact on their car buying.
Keep at it Ford. We’ll keep driving (or at least I will as soon as I get my truck).