How bad things are getting in the USA regarding the ecomony

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLysQmz_YcQ

What Bill O'Reilly said I think is completely dead on and I don't even like him one bit.

Prob is Obamort has done nothing but try to play Robin Hood. As a poor person struggling to get through college, Obama needs to stop trying to worry about the poor and try to get the busineeses going for the poor can get back working.
Obamacare NEEDS to be taken out right away IMO, While I agree it means no free health care, WE CANNOT AFFORD IT ONE BIT.

All I can is the election is 15 months away and the countdown begins till Obamort gets removed from the White House since only 32 percent of independants approve of Obama. Without the majority of the independant vote, Obama has about the same chance of being elected as Blue Jackets winning the Stanley Cup this year.

It's getting pretty bad. Mind, we are no Somalia, but we could get there very fast. It's proven fact that civilizations rise every slowly and fall very fast. America rose relatively fast, so its fall is likely to be extremely fast, like even a few years. Unless we change our lifestyle.

It took two generations for the U.S. to go from a primarily agrarian nation to a leading industrial nation.

ruveyn

But that was before modern technology. The world moves much, much faster now.

To the OP, what has Obama done for the poor?

Obama proposes good ideas, then lets the Republicans loose on them. The end result is a mangled mess that doesn't improve on anything, and is sometimes worse than if he'd done nothing. I still can't believe that the supposed solution to the healthcare crisis is "force everyone to buy insurance".

Well as one of these 'poor' college students I can say nothing Obama has done has really helped....and feeding more money into big buisness would not help either. What makes you think I can get some super competative job when I have mental problems and cannot handle that kind of stress?

But also what exactly has he done that indicates he even gives a damn about the poor as you say, he has demonstrated he is just another puppet owned by corporate america just like the rest of the government. And Obamacare is a freaking scam......I used to like him because he mentioned universal healthcare, well Obamacare is a joke compared to actual universal healthcare.

Sounds about right. Although to be honest, I'm not even so sure about his proposals, or how hard he even tries to fight for democratic policies. I don't recall him ever supporting any form of universal healthcare, which is what I think most democrats truly wanted. He came to the fight with a public option, which was already too watered down, IMO, and didn't even get that.

I used to think his middle-ground approach was both reasonable and beneficial. I've since realized that it's actually quite detrimental.

Sadly I think America could afford social programs if it wasn't for the corrupt central planning and micro managing of the nation. As well the the Republicans keeping the expensive military industrial complex going.

I want to see government power centralized out of D.C. back to the states. The states are probably much more flexible in fixing their local problems but I think the Federal government gets in the way or kicks back money with so many strings attached the states don't realize at first what kind of deal they got into.

Let's stop firehosing money into defense contracts while the American infrastructure and educational and health systems rot.
Problem solved.

When you've got an incessant and vast right wing noise machine screaming "communism" at every attempt to affect and foster change, and a majority of Americans so ignorant as to listen, you'd likely break for "middle ground", too, rather than foolishly commit political suicide for yourself and your hard line policies.

Please explain what part of "obamacare" provides free health care.

Also, what part of "obamacare" is preventing you or anybody else from getting a job?

Thanks for the DNC talking points. The truth is both major parties are full of people beholden to special interests, including the insurance companies.

I'd be content with middle ground policies. But Obama's been coming to the table with a middle ground starting point. The right screams Communism (and Socialism, Marxist, Kenyan, Muslim) and what we end up getting is right-leaning, watered down garbage that doesn't solve anything and only adds to our original problems. If instead, he came to the table with left-wing policies, then maybe, in theory, we'd end up with something closer to a middle ground.

Although, it really is just theory. Observation tells us that it's impossible to negotiate with a group that fancies non-negotiation pledges. On the right, you get political gain by sticking to your hard line policies. I think it's been foolish for the democrats not to take the same approach.

I think Obama's let the left down - big time.

Just what, pray, is a President of the United States--of either party--supposed to do?

It is Congress that appropriates money, and authorizes its expenditure. It is Congress that enacts legislation. Presidents have the profile to focus public debate, but very little capacity to give effect to their proposals, absent willing Congressional majorities.

And that, class, is why the military budget of the United States is as big as it is. Because the one real power that the President has is that he is the Commander-in-Chief. Provided that Congress funnels money to the military, the President has almost a free hand in its use. Need economic stimulus in location X? Make the next procurement contract from company Y contingent on building the goods in that location.

You have built a political system in which Congress can micromanage almost any issue on which it can legislate, so it should not surprise you that Presidents choose to act in the areas in which Congress can impede them the least.

You're probably right about the whole "compromise" motif being a knee-jerk reaction for the Democrats. I think many of them, Obama included, do consider going hardline progressive in their arguments as politically untenable. The problem is, this is exactly what the country needs most right now. I think the notion of a strong leftist stance being political suicide is, for the most part, an imaginary bogeyman that the Democrats have conjured up for themselves (and the GOP is more than happy to help keep the myth alive). If the Dems were politically willful enough to outwit the Republicans and win some actual victories for a change, rather than settle for 98% of the Republican platform, things would likely start turning around, and they'd be able to take the credit for the positive effects of finally standing up to the plutocracy. Sure, there would be Tea Party outrage-- but those people are totally insatiable no matter what Obama does, because their complaint is that Obama has the White House in the first place. They should be treated as the marginal fringe figures they really are.

When there are screams from the right, that Obama's "socialist" agenda is turning the United States into (GASP!) Canada or Sweden, the Democrats should counter that with, "Yes, and both Canada and Sweden have better healthcare and better standards of living right now." When the right wing decries "progressives" for ruining the country, the Dems should reply, "Progressivism is what got our country through the Great Depression and WWII." The Republicans, with as much as they trot out their love affair with big business, have given the Democrats all the ammunition they could ever possibly need to rally popular support among the poor and middle class, if only they had the courage to actually use it instead of caving to the insane corporatist demands everytime. These corporatists are the people ruining your backyards and your groundwater and the air you breathe. These are the people shipping your jobs overseas (contrary to that Republican BS about them being "job creators"). These are the people who have created that insulting lack of accountability. Why should they be given any say in the governing process after how badly they've screwed up everything? There is absolutely no sense in compromising with people who are ideologically opposed to even the concept of compromise. The only way things are ever really going to change for the better is if these people get cut out of the decision-making process.

QFT