During one of Obama’s campaign stops, the camera caught a lady screaming SOCIALIST at Obama. McCain and Palin reiterate that charge every chance they get – socialist! He wants to redistribute the wealth! How can you vote for him? I think the charge is having an effect on Obama’s lead.
It is no secret that I am a foe of socialism and preach capitalism every chance I get. But these days, the Republicans in charge, who swore to uphold the capitalist way, are using every socialist tool they know, to get the economy back on track – huh?
So McCain’s ranting against the socialism of Obama makes a kind of a hollow sound, but let’s examine the facts more closely.
I looked at both candidates and their tax platforms. Please remember that it does not matter what each candidate says he will do tax wise, Congress still has the last say as to what becomes law or not.
Looking at the tax proposals side by side, there is not much difference between the plans (well, Obama does give more to low and middle class people) until you get up high, say to the people that make $250,000 and above or the top 5% of the wage earners in the U.S.
McCain does not raise taxes on this group but Obama does; slightly. BUT Obama uses those tax increases to give to people that pay NO taxes, a kind of a refund, say $500. Since these people pay no taxes, this is more of a welfare check since they did not earn the so called “refund”. It is here that the charge of re-distributing the wealth; taking from the rich, to give to the poor, actually sticks and as we all know, that is pure Robin Hood socialism.
Obama defends his plan by saying the “trickle down economic theory” is obviously not working; that’s why we are in the mess we are in right now so we need to try something different. His argument here is right on but why isn’t it working when it has worked before? And will John McCain’s standard capitalistic economic methods suddenly begin to work when they are the ones that got us into the historic mess we are currently in– see how confusing this can be?
We have to reach back and examine the trickle down theory (Supply side economics) as opposed to the trickle up theory or (Demand side economics).
Put simply, when you give businesses and high income individuals tax breaks, they invest more money in business, allowing business entities to expand and sell more and in so doing, hire more people who use their wages to buy more goods – you see the logic?
Ronald Reagan (Reaganomics) followed this policy and made it work. Clinton, who was really a fiscal Republican, continued the program and prosperity reigned supreme.
The “demand side economic theory” also known as the “trickle up” theory says that giving the poor and middle class people more money through tax cuts, handouts, incentives etc. will prompt them to buy more products and therefore boost the manufacturing company’s sales, allowing them to hire more people who buy even more products – you see the logic here also - right?
I have always favored the supply side economic theory because it makes more sense and has been proven to work. On the other hand, giving the tax breaks or incentives to normal tax payers does not guarantee that those taxpayers will use the money in ways that will boost the economy. The last BILLION dollar incentive package to all tax payers produced no effect on our economy.
The point that I am trying to make here is that NORMAL ECONOMIC THEORIES DO NOT SEEM TO BE WORKING NORMALLY. Calling someone a socialist or a capitalist does not seem to mean what it used to and I believe the reason is that we have so corrupted our economy that normal rules cannot apply.
Former Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, was before Congress (poor old man) trying to explain how he screwed up because they now all blame him for our dilemma just as they were praising him in times of prosperity.
He made only one admission of guilt; that he did not regulate the “derivatives”. And here is the crux of our problem.
I posit that Wall Street has become a gambling Mecca (Hedge Funds, Short Selling….) where money is not invested to produce wealth through production, etc.; money is gambled on artificially structured financial strategies. The UNREGULATED gambling institutions play with TRILLIONS of dollars and when the economy does not perform as predicted, their goofy games collapse, bringing down legitimate financial investors that willingly or not, were caught up in this financial maelstrom.
Both presidential candidates must clean up Wall Street first. The days of Ayn Rand’s idealistic Laissez Faire economy can be achieved with success again but only after rules are applied and monitored.
BUT the socialist label still carries a negative stigma with Americans and re-distributing the wealth charges takes on an added negative as far as Obama is concerned, because it suggests “welfare” as in blacks on welfare which even poor whites react to with anger and disdain.
McCain has hit on an effective weapon against Obama because his supporters as well as most Americans don’t understand the real reasons for our financial free fall but do understand what welfare checks and food stamps stand for; freeloaders.
Obama, to reverse his potential decline in the last few weeks, needs to make Wall Street the monster that is devouring innocent people with its unrestrained and unregulated greed and name the Republicans (Greenspan & Bush & now McCain) as the keepers of Wall Street that kept feeding its greed instead of protecting the public from getting harmed by that greed.
Obama’s handlers, I am afraid, think populism / socialism will win the day; they are wrong and need to realize it quickly.
It is no secret that I am a foe of socialism and preach capitalism every chance I get. But these days, the Republicans in charge, who swore to uphold the capitalist way, are using every socialist tool they know, to get the economy back on track – huh?
So McCain’s ranting against the socialism of Obama makes a kind of a hollow sound, but let’s examine the facts more closely.
I looked at both candidates and their tax platforms. Please remember that it does not matter what each candidate says he will do tax wise, Congress still has the last say as to what becomes law or not.
Looking at the tax proposals side by side, there is not much difference between the plans (well, Obama does give more to low and middle class people) until you get up high, say to the people that make $250,000 and above or the top 5% of the wage earners in the U.S.
McCain does not raise taxes on this group but Obama does; slightly. BUT Obama uses those tax increases to give to people that pay NO taxes, a kind of a refund, say $500. Since these people pay no taxes, this is more of a welfare check since they did not earn the so called “refund”. It is here that the charge of re-distributing the wealth; taking from the rich, to give to the poor, actually sticks and as we all know, that is pure Robin Hood socialism.
Obama defends his plan by saying the “trickle down economic theory” is obviously not working; that’s why we are in the mess we are in right now so we need to try something different. His argument here is right on but why isn’t it working when it has worked before? And will John McCain’s standard capitalistic economic methods suddenly begin to work when they are the ones that got us into the historic mess we are currently in– see how confusing this can be?
We have to reach back and examine the trickle down theory (Supply side economics) as opposed to the trickle up theory or (Demand side economics).
Put simply, when you give businesses and high income individuals tax breaks, they invest more money in business, allowing business entities to expand and sell more and in so doing, hire more people who use their wages to buy more goods – you see the logic?
Ronald Reagan (Reaganomics) followed this policy and made it work. Clinton, who was really a fiscal Republican, continued the program and prosperity reigned supreme.
The “demand side economic theory” also known as the “trickle up” theory says that giving the poor and middle class people more money through tax cuts, handouts, incentives etc. will prompt them to buy more products and therefore boost the manufacturing company’s sales, allowing them to hire more people who buy even more products – you see the logic here also - right?
I have always favored the supply side economic theory because it makes more sense and has been proven to work. On the other hand, giving the tax breaks or incentives to normal tax payers does not guarantee that those taxpayers will use the money in ways that will boost the economy. The last BILLION dollar incentive package to all tax payers produced no effect on our economy.
The point that I am trying to make here is that NORMAL ECONOMIC THEORIES DO NOT SEEM TO BE WORKING NORMALLY. Calling someone a socialist or a capitalist does not seem to mean what it used to and I believe the reason is that we have so corrupted our economy that normal rules cannot apply.
Former Fed Chairman, Alan Greenspan, was before Congress (poor old man) trying to explain how he screwed up because they now all blame him for our dilemma just as they were praising him in times of prosperity.
He made only one admission of guilt; that he did not regulate the “derivatives”. And here is the crux of our problem.
I posit that Wall Street has become a gambling Mecca (Hedge Funds, Short Selling….) where money is not invested to produce wealth through production, etc.; money is gambled on artificially structured financial strategies. The UNREGULATED gambling institutions play with TRILLIONS of dollars and when the economy does not perform as predicted, their goofy games collapse, bringing down legitimate financial investors that willingly or not, were caught up in this financial maelstrom.
Both presidential candidates must clean up Wall Street first. The days of Ayn Rand’s idealistic Laissez Faire economy can be achieved with success again but only after rules are applied and monitored.
BUT the socialist label still carries a negative stigma with Americans and re-distributing the wealth charges takes on an added negative as far as Obama is concerned, because it suggests “welfare” as in blacks on welfare which even poor whites react to with anger and disdain.
McCain has hit on an effective weapon against Obama because his supporters as well as most Americans don’t understand the real reasons for our financial free fall but do understand what welfare checks and food stamps stand for; freeloaders.
Obama, to reverse his potential decline in the last few weeks, needs to make Wall Street the monster that is devouring innocent people with its unrestrained and unregulated greed and name the Republicans (Greenspan & Bush & now McCain) as the keepers of Wall Street that kept feeding its greed instead of protecting the public from getting harmed by that greed.
Obama’s handlers, I am afraid, think populism / socialism will win the day; they are wrong and need to realize it quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment