Friday, August 29, 2008

Obama's acceptance speech, part 1

Mr. Obama, I just have a few questions about your acceptance speech. You said,

"We're a better country than one where a man in Indiana has to pack up the equipment that he's worked on for 20 years and watch as it's shipped off to China, and then chokes up as he explains how he felt like a failure when he went home to tell his family the news."

In 1992 when Ross Perot ran against the first George Bush (the first one) and Bill Clinton, Perot warned repeatedly that if our country passed NAFTA and GAFTA we would hear “a giant sucking sound” of jobs leaving this country. We could argue about whether Perot's economic policies were sound, but he was absolutely right in his prediction. But both Bush and Clinton strongly supported NAFTA and GAFTA. So, Mr. Obama, do you just not know your recent history or were you lying when trying to pin this all on the current administration?

Obama said,

"We are more compassionate than a government that lets veterans sleep on our streets and families slide into poverty..."

I agree with you. But remember many, if not most, of our homeless suffer from serious addictions and mental health issues and it was the Left that shut down our state mental hospitals and pulled the rug out from under these people leaving them homeless.

Obama said,

"Ours -- ours is a promise that says government cannot solve all our problems, but what it should do is that which we cannot do for ourselves: protect us from harm and provide every child a decent education;"

Protect us from harm? Mr. Obama did you forget to mention that after 9/11 virtually no one in this country would have predicted that we would go seven more years without another major attack on our homeland? Did you forget to mention that George Bush is responsible for keeping us safe during that time?

And about providing a decent education: We spend billions of dollars in education and yet small, financially struggling private schools often (usually?) do a much better job educating students. If you really want to move toward a decent education system why don’t you stop pandering to the powerful teachers' union and support school vouchers which will allow competition and school choice! After all, you do represent the party of choice, right? Or are you just for the choice to kill unborn babies?

Obama said,

"I will -- listen now -- I will cut taxes -- cut taxes -- for 95 percent of all working families, because, in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle class."

So it sounds like you will only tax the super wealthy and the big corporations. But the super rich and big corporations are very savvy and have very expensive lawyers. Won’t they just shelter their wealth overseas or maybe even take their business overseas? After all, all of our good and well intentioned business regulations have caused them to take their jobs overseas! Do we really want to push big business overseas?

And what will keep them from just raising their prices? It sounds good to tax the rich but the reality is that this is not the whole story. Tax the oil companies more and I will just end up paying higher oil prices. Tax the auto industry more and I will just end up paying much more for my next car.

Obama said,

"And for the sake of our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, I will set a clear goal as president: In 10 years, we will finally end our dependence on oil from the Middle East.

But, Mr. Obama, for decades your party has fought against off-shore drilling. Your party also fought against drilling in that mosquito infested swamp called ANWR. Your party fought against increased coal mining. Your party fought against building new dams. Your party fought against building more nuclear power plants. It seems to many of us that we are in this energy crisis precisely because of the strangle-hold the radical environmentalists have on your party!"

Obama said,

"Washington has been talking about our oil addiction for the last 30 years. And, by the way, John McCain has been there for 26 of them."

Excuse me but your choice for Vice President has been in the Senate for 36 years so what's your point?

The fact is that both Republicans and Democrats are both responsible for not taking action after the last fuel crisis. In fact, ultimately, "we the people" are responsible because we would not have supported the necessary measures to achieve energy independence once the last crisis evaporated. If gas prices go down again, I have no doubt that all our concern about energy independence will go down too.

Obama said,

"I'll help our auto companies re-tool, so that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built right here in America."

Wonderful! Great idea. But, Mr. Obama, how are you going to do that? After all, our auto companies are among the largest companies in America and you have consistently vilified big business and want to tax them more. So are you going to hit them with higher taxes just so you can give the money back to them? Ahhh, I get it. Brilliant idea. First you take away their money through taxation, and then you offer to give it back to them as long as they do what you want them to do! That is how the government controls people and businesses with taxes! Sounds like a slippery slop towards a Soviet economy to me.

More later.


Alcamadus said...

The tax issue is somewhat of a Catch-22 though. Because like you said if you tax big buisness than they raise their prices, if you don't tax big business and give them tax breaks they still can take those benefits and then improve their company further by sending more jobs overseas and increasing their profits for the stockholders. Companies aren't going to just say, "Hey, they gave us these great tax breaks lets benefit our workers now." No, they are going to take advantage of the situation and increase their profits. And, it doesn't seem like prices are any better right now with the tax breaks.

Plus, it seems to me be a better plan to give the middle class the tax breaks (the backbone of our economy) so that they can actually start having spending power increasing companies profits through that. This way too, companies are still held accountable to being competitive because it makes the consumer have the power to make the CHOICE what they want to buy. If the price is too high, then they don't have to buy it and then the companies profits will decrease.

This is at least how I see it. Companies are made to benefit the shareholders and make an increasing profit. They aren't going to play "nice" if you give them tax breaks.

professor ed said...

As economics (IE the dismal science) is definitely not my storng suit, I am unable to comprehend how Obama can state
"I will -- listen now -- I will cut taxes -- cut taxes -- for 95 percent of all working families, because, in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle class." and still support universal health care. Where will he find the money for this MASSIVE, bureaucratic undertaking?

Kevin said...

I'm tired of this "my job went overseas" nonsense. If someone else can do the job as good or better then you for less money that's your problem... it's a free market, that's how it works. It's not nice, it's not easy on people, it means saving more and being cautious with your money or taking a risk. It means upheaval, but that's how it works... and at the end of the day we progress more quickly and end up w/ better and cheaper goods so people can get more with less.

This "my job went overseas" nonsense is equivalent to arguing against more fuel efficient automobiles because it will put gas-station owners, mom & pop gas stations, out of business.

Fighting progress on cost through regulation only gives foreign competitors an automatic advantage. If an American car costs more simply b/c America decides to protect our industry... the Japaense just sell more cars internationally, they just get better at making their cars, and eventually the American auto industry is left in the dust and can barely surivive... that's what has happened... that's what Barack Obama is saying. Short term gains in his power for long term failure in the American economy.

Kevin said...

On taxes... we've let our government create an unfair and inefficient tax system. The government creates the loopholes, the politicians trade tax favors for votes (in the form of reduced taxes, rebates, incentive programs, etc.) We end up with an unfair tax code in which the government says... "give me your money, and if you vote for me I may give you some back." This is absurd we lose fiscal freedom and ultimate liberty in this system.

We need radical tax reform. We need the government to have fewer controls over taxes so all people are treated equally. We need a Fair Tax.

Kevin said...

One point to add to my statements about whinning about job loss... the government can help people retool and can help provide short-term assistance to help people through job change. But we need to focus on helping people deal with the inevitable transition, we need to... as a society... come to accept that transition as part of modern life, and plan accordingly. Denying that it exists like Democrats would suggest is not an answer.

Dennis said...


Just for the record, I was not arguing about the merits (or lack thereof) of Perot's plan. Just that it is hypocritical for Obama to blame it all on the Republicans when the Democrats supported it too.

Alcamadus said...


I think you are dead on. We are undeniably living in a global market and to start closing that door would be disasterous to our economy. America has to start competing in a global market, because like you said if China or Japan starts dominating in manufacturing, etc...America is left in the dust. I think right now it is a big "shock" because a lot of the blue collar workers have been living in blue collar families for generations and now that those jobs are being "taken away" their entire worldview is shaken. But, like you said, they have to DEAL. Things change, especially in our generation today, business is changing so rapidly you can't NOT stay on your toes and protect yourself occupational wise.

I also think you are right on the FairTax, but as the current situation stands that doesn't seem like it is going to happen anytime soon. I am a realist thinking that business isn't going to be as generous as we think they will in a trickle down system. And why should they be? I don't blame them, I just don't think we should throw our meat to the wolves when we are starving. (Maybe that's a bit dramatic, but I don't care. lol)