| re: NJC: Congratulations to Barack Obama! | |
|
Posted by: |
Vin 02:32 pm UTC 11/07/08 |
| In reply to: | re: NJC: Congratulations to Barack Obama! - John_Galt 01:42 am UTC 11/07/08 |
| John, I've gotta fess up that I haven't brushed up on my textbook Socialism in many years, but I do recall that I was never convinced that all aspects of Socialism were bad (as opposed to Communism, which I recall determining at an early age pretty much sucked outright. Don't tell me my Nintendo belongs to every kid in the neighborhood, man.) As we seem to agree, there are elements of Socialism in our society that many folks probably wouldn't want to change. Most welfare programs, for example: unemployment, social security, medicare, etc. And we all want the state to fix the potholes, right? I mean, I'm certainly not going to fix my own damn potholes. I think I don't mind a little socialism in my capitalism; any civilized, compassionate society needs to ask itself: how low do we want to let the failures fall? And in pure Capitalism, it is inherent that there will be "failures": which includes hard-working, intelligent, honest people who just couldn't manage to start their own successful business or score one of the relatively scarce six-figure jobs (possibly because they couldn't afford the education to begin with.) It also includes degenerate, lazy fuck-ups. At the same time, guys like Bill Gates, Steve Forbes and Michael Jordan ought to be able to reap the riches from their innovation and talents, as well. Its a balancing act, but I don't believe Obama will bring this country nearly as far left as many people, yourself and Smeg included, believe he will. The Democrats in Congress still have constituents to answer to, who aren't as far Left as all that. I take largest issue with your comment about the "lovefest" Obama has received from "anti-american totalitarian socialists," somehow justifying GOP concerns about Obama. He's also received plenty of love from the leaders of Britain, Canada, France (France! The REAL Sarkozy.), Japan, Australia and others. Honestly, the whole freaking world has seemingly been longing for the end of the Bush administration, and it would be an act of flagrant denial if any American, and especially Republicans, didn't take a long, hard look in the mirror and wonder why, before jumping to the conclusion that the world just hated Bush because he was awesome and he made America even more awesome than it was before. Its been a given that the GOP would use the "bad guys want the Democrat to win" tactic since 2004, when they used it against John Kerry. Bush started a war with no good reason; Obama suggests he would prefer to actually sit down and talk with opposing heads of state (and that's what these guys are, whether we like it or not; they won't go away if we close our eyes and pretend they aren't there.) before deciding to fight them. I don't see that as cause for alarm; it strikes me more as the course of action that a reasonable leader takes, especially in this day and age. Obama seems to see the U.S. as one piece of the global community, and that's exactly what it is now. Bush could not accept that; he was stuck in the outdated model of the U.S. being the biggest fish in the pond, happy to work in conjunction with the smaller fish, unless the smaller fish disagreed. In that case, Fuck the Smaller Fish. The Bush administration's policies of "Cowboy Diplomacy" and unilateral taking of action outside of America's borders turned the world off; the equivalent of the class bully taking your lunch because He was hungry. He doesn't need any other justification, right? In fairness to Bush, I believe he meant well, and his administration was completely highjacked by 9/11. I never thought he was the right guy for the Presidency, but he was COMPLETELY not prepared to guide the ship through the turbulent seas set before him. It may turn out that Obama is not up to the task either. I freely admit that. But I favor letting a young guy with intellect and vision, with two little girls to think of with every decision he makes, take a crack at it, as opposed to a well-intentioned old man who is guided by the past, with a certifiable Right Wing Evangelical Crackpot (who can see Russia form her house!) as his Number Two. > Vin, > > You are correct that the progressive income tax is > socialistic and that stimulus plans designed to stimulate > consumer spending are probably socialistic in their > effect. Both are immoral and ineffective, and both have > been going on here for a long time. > > The difference between a socialist like Obama and a > weakling like Bush is that the former approves of these > longstanding mistakes while the later is just too weak to > prevent them from continuing. I worked on the Hill in > 2001 and there was still some dwindling hope that > Republicans would replace the progressive income tax with > either a Flat Tax or a National Sales Tax. Even with a > majority in the House, such dreams of change were anathema > to just about any Democrats. Last year's stimulus checks > were undoubtedly not Bush's preferred result, either. If > the Republicans couldn't get what they wanted done with a > small, but significant, advantage in the House during the > early years of the century, Bush would have no chance of > legislation in the form he'd like to see landing on his > desk in the last two years with Democratic majorities in > both houses. Remember, the Constitution will not allow > the President to present himself with legislation to > approve and execute. > > Most of the Left in the House love power more than they > believe that more beauracracy and redistrition will help > the poor. The failures of programs they believed in their > youth would bring about a better world has tempered their > Socialist glee. They preach class warfare, but understand > there are realistic limitations to state action. I'm not > sure what Obama believes because the primary candidate and > the general election candidate don't resemble each other > much and before that he was barely a legislator and never > had a landmark legislative acheivment. But, when > Republicans talk about Obama being a "socialist," I think > what they mean is that unlike Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi, > Obama is a true believer in the superiority of the state > to human liberty in almost every sphere. Judging from the > lovefest anti-american totalitarian socialists like Hugo > Chavez and Fidel Castro have been showing Obama, > Republicans may have been justified in their concerns. > > -=John Galt=- > > > Obama may have some socialist leanings, but not for his > > tax policy proposals. Or "spreading the wealth." > > > > The U.S. already has a graduated income tax system under > > which people who make more money pay higher tax rates. If > > that is a socialist principle then it is one that has been > > in place here for a long time. Obama is proposing a > > difference in degree, not in principle. > > > > And oddly enough, what was the Republican's big economic > > booster plan this past year? Stimulus checks? They gave > > an extra tax refund to people under the theory that, if > > they had more money in their pockets, they would spend it > > and that would help boost the economy. Oh, and if you > > made over a certain amount of money, you did not get a > > stimulus check. Sounds a bit like "spreading the wealth" > > to middle and lower class citizens, doesn't it? As a > > Republican-espoused economic panacea, no less. And I > > didn't notice any complaints about it being a "Socialist" > > tactic, either. > > > > > > > So which is it? Socialism or communism? Not that it > > > matters, since he doesn't want either. In fact, the > > > socialism that Bush has been giving us is the very thing > > > that got him elected! > > > > > > > What will happen is that in 6-12 months you will all see > > > > all the socialist policies he has tried to implement, that > > > > our economy will worsen if he implements his plans and > > > > that his foreign policies will be dangerous. And the poor > > > > welfare people who voted for him because "I won't have to > > > > worry about putting gas in my car or paying my mortgage > > > > because he'll take care of me." will be surprised that > > > > communism doesn't work in the US any better than it did in > > > > the rest of the world. You'll all see... and just like > > > > Jim you'll all say "Everything that Smeg said was the > > > > truth." | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: NJC: Congratulations to Barack Obama! - John_Galt 01:42 am UTC 11/07/08 |
| Next: | re: NJC: Congratulations to Barack Obama! - John_Galt 02:15 am UTC 11/08/08 |
| Thread: |
|