In 1992, former President Clinton ran for president with the slogan: "It's about the economy, stupid". Well, this time around, it's about more than the economy.
Despite what the pundits may say, underlining the issues of unemployment, slow growth and unprecedented debt, there is deep concern about where we are heading.
In a recently discovered tape from 1998, Barack Obama is heard as saying that he believed in the "redistribution" of wealth. And in a quote from the 2008 campaign, he responded to a question from "Joe the plumber" by saying that we need to "spread the wealth". As president, he has stated on numerous occasions that he aims to raise taxes on the rich so that they pay their "fair share".
Without serious cuts in spending, taxes on the rich alone will neither cover the deficit or whatever other programs Obama has in mind. Additional sources will have to be found. Potentially any private asset (401k's and IRA's for instance) may be the target for new taxes.
As part of the "Affordable Care Act" (or Obamacare) regulations have been issued to force religious institutions to provide contraceptives and abortifacient drugs in their health insurance policies. The mandate is contrary to the beliefs of Catholics and other people of faith.
Also under the "Affordable Care Act", twenty new or additional taxes will be imposed on individuals and businesses. Included are an additional Medicare tax on income, a surtax on investment income, the individual mandate "tax", an excise tax on health insurance etc. Given a history of rising health care costs, these taxes and the social security medicare deduction, are bound to increase.
In a second term, we can expect more regulations from an Obama administration. His propensity to issue executive decrees to circumvent legislative intent or to implement rules without Congressional approval will keep the bureaucracy busy to our detriment.
Consider for example decrees he has already issued granting waivers for work requirements of the welfare law passed under Clinton and his decree changing immigration rules without Congress's involvement.
In light of President Obama's record and his statements, it is more than likely that we will see more of the same if he is reelected to a term where he will have "more flexibility".
This election is critical. It is more than just about the economy. It calls into question what our future holds. It is about individual freedom and REAL opportunity. It is about what type of government we want and what type of country we want for ourselves and for our children.
Despite what the pundits may say, underlining the issues of unemployment, slow growth and unprecedented debt, there is deep concern about where we are heading.
In a recently discovered tape from 1998, Barack Obama is heard as saying that he believed in the "redistribution" of wealth. And in a quote from the 2008 campaign, he responded to a question from "Joe the plumber" by saying that we need to "spread the wealth". As president, he has stated on numerous occasions that he aims to raise taxes on the rich so that they pay their "fair share".
Without serious cuts in spending, taxes on the rich alone will neither cover the deficit or whatever other programs Obama has in mind. Additional sources will have to be found. Potentially any private asset (401k's and IRA's for instance) may be the target for new taxes.
As part of the "Affordable Care Act" (or Obamacare) regulations have been issued to force religious institutions to provide contraceptives and abortifacient drugs in their health insurance policies. The mandate is contrary to the beliefs of Catholics and other people of faith.
It should be self evident to the administration that such an imposition is clearly in violation of the second amendment's guarantee of religious freedom. If allowed to stand, what else will follow: will religious institutions be forced to perform abortions or other procedures mandated by government? Will procedures now covered be denied as "too costly"?
Also under the "Affordable Care Act", twenty new or additional taxes will be imposed on individuals and businesses. Included are an additional Medicare tax on income, a surtax on investment income, the individual mandate "tax", an excise tax on health insurance etc. Given a history of rising health care costs, these taxes and the social security medicare deduction, are bound to increase.
In a second term, we can expect more regulations from an Obama administration. His propensity to issue executive decrees to circumvent legislative intent or to implement rules without Congressional approval will keep the bureaucracy busy to our detriment.
Consider for example decrees he has already issued granting waivers for work requirements of the welfare law passed under Clinton and his decree changing immigration rules without Congress's involvement.
In light of President Obama's record and his statements, it is more than likely that we will see more of the same if he is reelected to a term where he will have "more flexibility".
This election is critical. It is more than just about the economy. It calls into question what our future holds. It is about individual freedom and REAL opportunity. It is about what type of government we want and what type of country we want for ourselves and for our children.
Norm, you are absolutely right about taxation not getting us anywhere near solvency. The problem is that for every new tax they place on the rich, there will be a new loophole created/found to get around it. Romney's released 2011 return from today showed a ~13% effective tax rate. Im sure Obama wasnt paying anywhere near the marginal rate either.
ReplyDeleteAs for the line about redistribution, its cute and fits the talking points, but is out of context, and from 14 years ago.
http://ezkool.com/2012/09/the-full-context-of-obamas-i-actually-believe-in-redistribution-statement/
As far as the contraceptives go, no one can make you use them, but part of being a employer is making sure that certain minimum requirements are met. This legislation wasn't written to screw over employers who wouldn't normally support such products. It was written so that employees have options should they want to use them. It is not a requirement that employees of Catholic employers be Catholic (or that they subscribe to every tenant of the church) as far as I know. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/05/birth-control-and-the-catholic-church.html
Anyway, as I have said before, I think the only trend in government is bigger, no matter which party is elected. Hopefully, we can get more clarity on these crucial issues during the debates. Both parties are infringing on our liberties at an alarming rate. Whether is it under the guise of national security or good health, Americans are trusted less and less each day to make decisions for themselves.
I agree wholeheartedly with your conclusion that "Americans are trusted less and less each day to make decisions for themselves".
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion it will get worse if Obama stays in office for the reasons I cited in my post with Obamacare being at the top of the list. (There are ways to fix the country's health problems without stepping on everyone's freedom).
No one can guarantee that Romney can turn this ship around in four years or even eight but I think its a start in the right direction. It may take someone more conservative than Romney (or libertarian) president after that to get the country on its proper course in line with constitutional principles.
I leave you with one last thought: If the country is driven too far to the left (or right for that matter) and we have more serious financial problems (a distinct possibility) there may be some serious consequences---If you don't think so, just take a look at German history post WWI. Our country has many diverse constituencies and is best governed from the middle. That requires compromise something I see in short supply from both political extremes.
I wish to differ with Ryan on a couple points. Redistribution is a political philosophy which is embraced by Obama. As Ryan correctly refers to the 1998 comment as being old, we must recall the Obama response to Joe the Plumber which was in 2008; "you gotta share the wealth Joe". May I suggest reading: We Were Born to Shine....Because We Believe, by Ruth Stafford. Ruth is a retired school teacher (46 yrs.), her book is outstanding. I will forward to Norm a speech by Ruth, maybe Norm can post it? (I got permission to share the speech). This book is an eye opener re: the effects of sharing the wealth via government creating dependency among its people.
ReplyDeleteI am an employer and I strongly object to the government mandating insurance coverage which goes against my religious conscience ( I am Catholic). Being pregnant is not an illness or disease. The choice is the employees. If you don't wish to get pregnant, as an employer, it's certainly not my responsibility. After all, what the employee does in private, is supposed to be none of my business, so if they chose to have sex, be they married, single, living with a significant other....shouldn't they be responsible for such "things" as has been the case for multiple decades? The employee does have an option, go find another job if they don't like my pay and benefit package. Be careful allowing government to mandate benefits. Isn't it bad enough to witness what has and continues to expand government benefits for those who don't work? By the way, the contraceptive mandate was not passed by Congress, rather mandated by the head of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, an Obama appointee. Laws/mandates are one thing when passed by the legislature and signed into law by a president. Totally different when such power is given to one department "head", such a Sebelius...I must ask, as Ryan "generalized" about both parties infringing on our rights, what rights have the republicans taken away? As for growing government, I understand republicans wish to reduce government. Have you ever heard a democrit talk about cutting government? All the dems cut is our national defense, aka the military. Remember, since 2007, the dems controlled the senate and until 2011, the house as well. Remember, under Obama's leadership, our debt will have increased $6T in just four years. Our credit rating has dropped for the 1st time in our countries history and in case you missed it, it was reduced yet again.
Kenny's comments remind us that in any social relationship, whether private or public, both parties have responsibilities as well as rights. In a employer/employee situation where heath care insurance is provided, the employee should expect the health care coverage as promised. But he should not expect the employer to pay for procedures in an insurance plan that are contrary to his religious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteThe same is true in a relationship between a doctor (or other provider) and a patient. The patient has a right to expect proper care from the doctor but a doctor has the right not to provide care, such as abortion, if it is contrary to his religious beliefs.
While pregnancy is certainly not a illness or a disease, it is a medical condition that results in large medical bills. Of course you have the right to use your religious beliefs as a guide for other people's available health coverage, but is it practical? If all of your employee's practiced prevention, whether it be in the use of contraceptives, exercise, diet, or screening, your health care costs would be dramatically less. Ultimately, its just good business.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Republican party restricting freedoms, I was mostly referring to the new legislation of the Patriot Act and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Privacy and freedom of speech have gone out the window. You could easily make the case that the Republican party has gone out of its way to deny homosexuals the right to marry. There have also been reductions in freedom of speech (censorship), reductions in freedom of religion, and the list goes on.
The point here is not that the Republican party is all bad and the Democratic party is all good. I dont believe that to be the case at all. I think we need to be critical of the party we are supporting just as much as the opposing party.
The reason Romney cant tell us exactly how he is going to achieve the noble goals he promotes (job growth, fostering an environment for small business, restoring individual liberties, etc) is that its extremely hard to do. The devil is in the details, and I cant make a judgement without those details.
I dont believe in a redistribution of wealth, but we have a system where money equals influence. Those who have it can create legislation that is advantageous to their interests often at the expense of those without. How we create an egalitarian system, I dont know.
As for the deficit, it went from 0 to 8 trillion under the most recent Bush presidency. The government grew with new programs like no child left behind andnthe department of homeland security. Tax cut were initiated that sped up the growth of that debt. I certainly oppose the rate at which our deficit is growing, but I have yet to hear a policy that tackles it well while avoiding recession.
Anyway, I appreciate the dialogue here. Im sorry for the disjointed response. I had to keep scrolling up to see what needed answering.
Ryan
ReplyDeleteI will try to respond to each of your points in the order that you raised them.
1. With all due respect to your opinion, many business owners might b e offended by implications that they would place what is "practical" over their religious beliefs. It is true that prevention programs can help in avoiding health problems and many businesses have them. But to say that contraceptives should be part of a health insurance plan without regard to the owner's religious values disregards the fundamental right of religious liberty cited in the 1st amendment of the Constitution.
2. The Patriot Act as I understand it provides for the government to obtain intelligence domestically. The Act also mandates a warrant to be issued for such activity when there is cause to believe that a security threat exists. I don't understand how this or the Homeland Security Department is affecting your (or my) privacy or freedom of speech.
Your charge that "Republicans" are against recognizing the right of homosexuals to marry is misleading. I think that there are many people of faith on both sides of the aisle as well as independents who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. If the State wants to grant certain legal rights (such as in inheritance laws etc.), to two persons of the same sex in a relationship, that is within its prerogative. Such relationships may be called civil unions or whatever but they are not marriages.
3. You are right--neither party is all good or all bad.
4. Romney has given details of his economic plan; you should check out: mittromney.com
I would compare his plan favorably with Obama's generalities and outright misrepresentations any day. The debate next Wed. (10/3) should go a long way to prove that point if Romney stands up and makes his case. (It would also help if the mass media would stop being advocates and become journalists!).
5. The answer to unequal influence in our society is not "redistribution"; that solution is not only unfair to hard working men and women who work hard for their incomes but is counterproductive as well. It could destroy capitalism and threaten our freedoms. The better alternative lies in reforming the way we are governed (term limits, revised tax code, smaller government, more transparency etc.).
6. I assume that when you say the "deficit", you meant "debt" ("deficits" usually refer to the annual shortfall in revenues vs. spending). The total debt under President Bush did not increase from zero to $8 trillion, as you state, but from $6 to $10 trillion over eight years (an average of $.5 trillion per year or 3.2% of GDP). That compares to an increase from $10 to $16 trillion under President Obama over just under four years (an average of $1.5 trillion per year or 8.3% of GDP.
Both presidents can be faulted for not being more aggressive in addressing deficits and the consequent rise in the debt. But Obama missed a golden opportunity to tackle this issue head on in his first two years when Democrats controlled both houses of Congress. Instead he chose to concentrate his efforts on the "Affordable Care Act" and a stimulus package that not only added to the debt but was ineffective. That failure was recognized by the voters in the 2010 congressional elections when Republicans made gains in both of the legislative branches. During the last two years, the Obama administration has made little headway in improving the economy (some metrics show that the economy has gone backward, not forward). I know he still tries to blame it on anybody but himself but as president he has not only failed to provide leadership, he has too often made some bone headed decisions (wasteful expenses on solar panels, keystone pipeline etc.) For those reasons and many others, he should not be reelected.
Norm. Fair enough. I guess it just seems like the opposite of religious freedom to deny someone else the ability to express theirs (through the use of contraception). From my understanding, it doesnt cost the employer any more. Its essentially transparent to the employer as the request comes from the insured to the insurer. Maybe Im mistaken.
ReplyDeleteI watched Mitt on 60 minutes, and he made it clear that we should just trust him to get into Washington and trim the fat/close the loopholes. He wouldnt name any programs/loopholes. He also said he is not going to make the cuts Ryan proposed to medicare. That would have saved 700B and doesnt affect patient benefits as I understand it. That is mostly because most of their narrative is scaring seniors about these proposed 'cuts'. He is making it clear that no cuts will take place any time soon, which tells me he is no more serious about dealing with the deficit/debt than Obama. He also plans to keep the Bush tax cuts, which keep the deficit growing.
Anyway, I look forward to the debates. Should be interesting and enlightening. Tell Sandy to look out for a package from the girls sometime soon. I just got back from Ohio and will drop it in the mail.
Ryan
ReplyDeleteThanks for your response.
On contraceptives: They are not expensive, can be paid for privately and available from many sources if someone is intent on using them without asking an employer to compromise his religious beliefs.
On the debt: I'm not familiar with all the proposal details to reform Medicare. I recall that Obama's plan called for a $700 B cut in Medicare payments to providers to pay for Obamacare. Where that stands now, I'm not sure. I don't recall the Ryan plan calling for such a reduction; I believe both Romney and Ryan have said on numerous occasions that their plans for Medicare reform would not affect those persons currently receiving benefits or for those near retirement (55 years old and older).
The economy and specifically the debt will take many years to fix. I think Romney is the better man to do it because of his background and experience. To me he demonstrated his seriousness, credibility and determination to get the job done by picking Ryan as his running mate. I also encourage you to check out his web site to learn more of his plans and to watch the debate next week.
Message to Sandy has been delivered and she's excited to receive the package.
Norm
Depending on the type of contraceptive used, it can actually be rather expensive. The cheapest is about $15/month, and the most expensive is $70. For most people, thats more than spare change. Anyway, I think we have discussed this enough and I respect your opinion.
ReplyDeleteI found this reference to the evolution of the various positions on the 716B Ryan and Obama would take from Medicare. Romney previously said he would sign the Ryan budget if it came to his desk, but has since taken the position that the 716B will stay.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/fact-check-obama-ryan-romney-backed-medicare-cuts/
I will check out the Romney site.
-Ryan
Ryan
ReplyDeleteI agree that we need not carry this discussion any further. However, I find it worthwhile to discuss these important issues and its an opportunity for me to do some critical thinking. I thank you for helping me do that.
Have a good week-end.
Norm