Comments about ‘We need solutions, not sound bites’

Governments have crossed the Rubicon and there's no going back. From my perspective, this article talks about where we went wrong without knowing it: government has become too influential in our lives. We look to government for solutions to problems that they've caused in the first place. Call me cynical, but looking to government for solutions is THE PROBLEM. I can't see anything EVER getting better, but I can see them getting worse. Have a nice day.

We need a president with the daring to have the federal government be the employer of last resort, like the CCC and PWA. Without such daring and radical meausres we are going to slogging our way through this collapse ten years from now at least. My wife and I wrote a proposal which would have had President Obama propose an updated CCC for unemployed vets (a national scandal). It was a well thought out IMHO. I sent it to the presdent, vice president, Senator Reid and various other Democrats. It was ingored of course (except for Congressman Matheson). If the current administration doesn't get out of its calculating rut it's toast and so are we.

Re: "We need solutions, not sound bites"

Give me the sound bites, please!

Liberal "solutions" are killing us!

"Liberal "solutions" are killing us!" An inverted pyramid of abstract financial instruments was built on top of unserviceable mortgages (mostly during the Bush II years), the housing bubble was inflated with the support of Alan Greenspan (Ayn Rand devotee), taxes for the wealthy were slashed, and two wars were fought off-budget - leading to masssive deficits. The housing bubble finally popped in 2007. While there is culpability to go around, I fail to see any of this as liberalism run amok.

What would happen if we ended the special tax breaks for the top 2%, we lowered corporate tax rates and closed all loopholes, assessed a heavy penalty tax for American corporations who outsource, reversed the ruling that gave corporations personhood status, and pulled our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan?

How's that for some solutions? Because I have more.

What would happen if we stopped the "tax breaks" for the 50% of Americans who receive benefits without paying income tax?

What would happen if we stopped asking "Washington" to wipe our "noses"?

What would happen if each of us stood up like men and shouldered the responsibilities that we demanded as citizens?

There is no free ride. There is no free meal. There is no "nanny" who is going to wipe our noses without first taking money from someone else.

Everyone of use has the responsibility to take care of ourselves without looking to Washington or to the State or to our "bishop" to pay our bills. There are a FEW who can't handle their own needs, but it has become the MANY who demand assistance. That will never work.

Amen, Earl. Here are some stats to back up your claim, as pulled from federal statistics data: In 2010, 18.3% of total US personal income was in the form of a government payment of some kind (Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits, etc.) This is up from a two decade constant (1980-2000) of 12.5%. On the other hand, wages accounted for 51%--the lowest share of income since 1929 (earliest government statistics.)

And I agree that we're only going to see these numbers increase if we continue to head in the direction we're now going. In a word, completely unsustainable. Especially considering our government is already bankrupt...

Re: Mike - "What would happen if we stopped asking "Washington" to wipe our "noses"?

We ask Washington to wipe our noses, so to speak, because the private economy crashes with regularity, e.g. 1819, 1837, 1873, 1893. 1907, 1919, 1929, 1954, 1982, 1987, 1991, 1997, 2007(!). We turn to government because your beloved (and there is a lot to be said for it let us admit) private sector economy crashes and burns periodically - it's just part of the system, as is relief from Washington.

There is no "relief" from Washington. The "relief" comes from the pockets of our fellow citizens. Washington has no money. Washington takes money from the "wealthy" and redistributes that money to others. That is stealing. We all know that we can't take someone else's money, but we allow Washington to do it for us.

If the economy "crashes", the "system" is not at fault. It doesn't give us the right to take the assets of our fellow citizens. It doesn't give us the "right" to demand that Washington act as our "strong arm thug" to rob others for us.

Re: Christy | 3:33 p.m. Sept. 17, 2011

If we seized everything from the top 2% we'd still be in big trouble. No, the solution is for big brother to start expecting people to stand on their own two feet and provide for themselves. We've taught women that if they chose to have babies out of wedlock somebody else will take care of them. Those of us who work have grown tired of carrying those who chose to stay at home and watch TV.

Who said anything about seizing everything from the top 2%? That's just silly. I agree with another poster who suggested rescinding ALL the Bush Tax Cuts, not merely for the top 2%. If we went back to the 1990's tax rates, we'd pay down our deficit much quicker.

How many single women are choosing to have babies and expecting others to pay for them?

How many people choose to stay home and watch TV? I really want to know, Rifleman. How many of the almost 50 million American citizens who've sunk into poverty the last few years do you think are choosing to stay home and watch TV?

It's a mathematical fact that you can always spend more than you earn if your really put your mind to it. Giving Obama more tax money would be like giving an alcoholic more booze. He's squander it away, put zero dollars towards our debt, and we'd end up worse than before.

People have lost faith in Obama's ability to deliver on his promises and he's going to be a one term president.

I have a solution and not a sound bite. Here it is. Are you ready?

HOPE and CHANGE!

Imagine that I am going to build a factory to make typewriters. What would happen? The company would go out of business. Now imagine that the government decides for political reasons to subsidize factories that make typewriters. Instead of one company making a bad decision and failing, you have thousands of companies make bad decisions to take advantage of a government subsidy.

This is how so many of these 'economic crises' are created. Look at 'green energy' or better yet look at housing. You can follow that chain of events from the high risk borrower, who got the loan form the lender, who never would have made the loan except they could sell it to Fannie Mae, who was being told by the government: "don't worry, the taxpayer has your back." Not to mention first time buyer programs and mortgage interest deductions, artificial demand was created and eventually it crashed.

I know what you are saying "b-b-but the greed of the bankers!" Well maybe they were greedy like kids in a candy store...but I am more concerned about who unlocked the door and let them in.

Christy writes: "What would happen if we ended the special tax breaks for the top 2%"

Answer: President Obama would feel empowered to throw good money after bad in hopes of buying votes in the upcoming election. Obviously nothing President Obama has tried up to now has worked and so he want to make the same mistakes again.

Has America dumbed down? There as many opinions as there are sound bites. Why is it no one wants to tackle the real problem? Why have the States failed to demand a Constitutional Convention and pass the amendment to set term limits for polticians. Has everyone forgot, "Congress" has the power of the purse. Congress has been serving it's own interest for the last 60 years. What is wrong with us?

We work hard and try to raise our families and just complain about the excess of government. Yet, we have not really taken the steps to stop government.
Term limits are needed. Rep. and Dem's are equally responsible for our mess.

Re: ". . . I fail to see any of this as liberalism run amok."

I would have predicted as much.

Liberals invariably refuse to accept responsibility for the results of their actions and policies. The housing bubble debacle, for instance. Caused by liberalization of banking laws during the Clinton years and the rape of government-backed mortgage institutions by liberals in Congress, starting as far back as Clinton, but hitting full stride during liberal control of Congress during the Bush II years [Barney Frank/Chuck Schumer's antics].

But liberal failure to acknowledge failure doesn't change the inarguable fact of total and abject failure. New Deal to Square Deal to New Frontier to Great Society/War on Poverty to Misery Index to Third Way, and now, Hope and Change. Miserable, abject failures, one and all.

What did Einstein say about insanity and repetition?