The Obamanation

[Aliantha]

I think it's bleak if you don't like the idea of safety nets and have no faith in your governments ability to manage them. On the other hand, you could view it as a positive step towards caring for those less fortunate or in situations that're sometimes hard to get out of.

[smoothmoniker]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I think it's bleak if you ... have no faith in your governments ability

ding ding ding! Bang on the money.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I think it's bleak if you don't like the idea of safety nets and have no faith in your governments ability to manage them. On the other hand, you could view it as a positive step towards caring for those less fortunate or in situations that're sometimes hard to get out of.

They never have been able to manage them so what makes you think we should suddenly have faith in their ability to do so now? No, I see it as a further step towards a socialist european model.

[classicman]

He will use the expansive powers of the Federal Communications Commission to impose “local” control and ownership of radio stations and to impose the “fairness doctrine” on talk radio. The effect will be to drive talk radio to the Internet, fundamentally change its economics, and retard its growth for years hence.

That is a bad idea - The fairness doctrine is anything but fair.

[Clodfobble]

Unlike the Bush stimulus checks, this new program will be a permanent entitlement, a part of our budget that can only go up and never down.

Insomuch as anything our government ever does is permanent. It will not automatically expire, but it can be gotten rid of just as easily as it is implemented.

[classicman]

Has a great potential to create a more dependent society. I'm ok with giving people a hand, but I don't like the idea of a handout. That can further the entitlement mentality.

[Aliantha]

Just because a society develops more of a social conciousness doesn't mean they're going to turn into socialists over night...or at all.

[TheMercenary]

I don't think our society has been without a social consciousness. Our government has just not considered throwing money at social issues until recently.

[Aliantha]

I didn't say it had. In fact, my exact wording was 'more of a social conciousness'. (pardon the spelling error)

I know this argument has been had here many many times, but the level of assistance the govt provides citizens in Australia and the UK is much higher on average than that of the US and yet we're no closer to communism than you are. We still have massive social issues though, and some people think the govt should give more here...others think less.

Personally I think the balance is about right atm for us although it sux that our family benefits nothing at all from government assistance at all. Being what's considered high middle income earners, we dip out from both sides. We don't get the tax breaks high earners manage, but we get none of the assistance from various schemes the government offers. I don't think we suffer because of it, but it annoys me that Dazza works so hard and financially we're really not much better off than people who earn $30k less.

[TheMercenary]

True. You are more a more taxed burdened society and society is more dependent on government handouts. Which creates an environment of dependence. No?

[Aliantha]

Not exactly. It means if you need help it's there. Most people are not dependant on the government, but there are programs available for those who need help.

We are in no way dependant on the govt ourselves as i mentioned. Nor is my father who happens to be pretty annoyed with the govt atm. He's recently retired, owns property, has never had to accept help from the govt and is self funded as a retiree (not through superannuation which is like your 401k accounts from what I can tell), and yet he just wanted a public transport card so he can get half price fares and do some train trips, but he's not eligible because he is 'too wealthy'. You should hear him grumbling about it! lol I don't think he should care so much though. He doesn't need it, but there are plenty who do. I get his point, but seriously, he's created exactly the life he wanted for himself and no one can take it away from him now. That's better than needing to rely on the govt in my view.

[classicman]

I had to scroll up and doublecheck who the poster was on that one.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by classicman

I had to scroll up and doublecheck who the poster was on that one.

She is one of my best friends and I love her to death. If I get divorced I am going to marry her. But we could never discuss politics before we had sex.

[Shawnee123]

heehee, I am worshipping sugarpop right now!

[TheMercenary]

Hollow victory: Republicans deliver slap in the face to Barack Obama
By: Toby Harnden at Jan 29, 2009

President Barack Obama got the $825 (or $1.2 trillion over a decade) stimulus package through the House of Representatives but the 244 to 188 vote is a hollow victory indeed. Without a single Republican voting for the bill, his high-profile visit to Capitol Hill on Tuesday came to exactly naught - at least on the House side.

Obama vowed to change Washington and usher in a new post-partisan era. The the mood music and optics were pitch perfect as he trekked up to the Hill. Republicans praised his gesture, welcomed his sincere demeanour and appreciated his willingness to listen.

Problem was, he wanted only to listen and did not want to act on what Republicans said. When he was asked if he would re-structure the package to include more tax cuts, he reportedly responded: "Feel free to whack me over the head because I probably will not compromise on that part."

He apparently added: " I understand that and I will watch you on Fox News and feel bad about myself."

That's fine. No doubt Obama will indeed get beaten up on Fox News. But his failure to get even the squishiest moderate Republican - including the 11 entertained in the White House by Rahm Emanuel last night - to back him is not merely a big score for Rep Eric Cantor, Republican Whip, and the rest of the GOP leadership.

It also shows that it is not just Fox, the loony Right or Rush Limbaugh - or however else you might want to characterise the opposition in order to marginalise it - who had grave misgivings about the content of the bill.

The Democratic leadership on Capitol Hill badly miscalculated by treating the bill as a victor's charter. Not that it seemed to bother Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, who grinned from ear to ear as she announced the result of the vote.

Obama said yesterday he did not feel he had ownership of the bill. Be that as it may, if it goes through the Senate in similar fashion and is signed into law then - the efforts of Pelosio and Senator Harry Reid notwithstanding - it will be his and his alone.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_ha...o_barack_obama