Published: Sunday, Sept. 23 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
The conservatives love to slam the "welfare queens," but they will
never be able to solve the real problem, which is medical costs. Republicans
simply lack the backbone to stand up to insurance companies, medical
conglomerates, pharmaceutical companies, and the AMA. Remember when
the head of J.P. Morgan Chase, Jamie Dimond, testified before Congress? Even
though his company had just lost over two billion dollars in bad trading deals,
the Republicans were practically bending over and kissing his ring! If we cut
healthcare costs some corporate special interest will get less money, and the
Republicans won't allow that.
We have juiced our economy with 3% plus deficit spending for years. Since 2009,
this has jumped to approximately 10%. It is going to be very painful 1) When we
stop juicing the economy with debt, and 2) Extremely painful if we actually have
to reverse and pay down debt (e.g. budget surplus). In fact, by my knowledge,
no major economy forced to cut back has ever made the transition back to fiscal
responsibility through austerity. Once we get to that point (like Greece, maybe
Spain, Portugal and Italy), it will be too late. Economic calamity is also
certain. This is not doomsday talk, just simple reality. And we
don't have very long before we reach this point. If we get our act
together IMMEDIATELY, it MAY be possible to avoid calamity, but even now it is
not certain. One thing is for sure: Even if we make needed changes now, it
WILL be painful. But it will also be much less painful than it will be if we
wait until our global creditors force us to change our stupid ways.
The top 10 of those who pay NO FEDERAL INCOME TAX reside in the following
states:1. Mississippi2. Georgia3. Alabama4.
Florida5. Arkansas6. S. Carolina7. New Mexico8. Idaho9. Texas10. UtahMitt Romney was describing his base when he
indicted the 47%.Yet, his base will continue to vote for him.
What social compact? I didn't sign it. My social compact is the
Constitution, and the commitments I have made personally to care for the poor
and the needy. I chose these things freely.If your social compact
says you can take my property by force, and give it to someone else, then I
As usual, this opinion piece and most of the comments address a symptom or two
of a much deeper illness without mentioning the germ that is causing those
symptoms. We need to ask different questions. Why do we have so many people on
food stamps? Why do we have such high unemployment when corporations are sitting
on piles of cash? Why has inequality been steadily increasing since the Reagan
years?The underlying reason is the nature of the corporate version
of capitalism we have espoused, and this system is favored by both Republican
and Democrats. The system is designed at its most fundamental level to pay one
group (the owners and managers of capital) as much as possible while paying
another group (wage laborers) as little as possible. This is why labor
productivity is so important to businesses and why they ship jobs off to Third
World countries.A progressive tax code does a little redistributing,
but it doesn't address the underlying problem. If we want a healthier
economy, we must consider sharing a fair portion of ownership with those whose
efforts actually create the wealth. Then a flat tax would actually make sense.
To finish my previous comment, William Greider was right when he pointed out
that the problem with our current version of capitalism is not, as Marx
supposed, that people own capital. It is that not enough of them do. Fix that,
and everything else is much easier to figure out.
Romney was not wrong when he implied that we have a lot of "moochers" in
our society. He was wrong however when he tried to include too many people in
that group to make the numbers sound more dire (what? politicians do that??).A person who pays into social security all their life and is now in
retirement years, is not a moocher. A person who works hard and pays taxes, but
this year collected 3 months of unemployment when between jobs, is not a
moocher.A moocher (in my opinion) is someone who takes more overall
out of the system than they contribute into the system even though they are
capable of doing the opposite. With so many entitlements, it allows lazy and
dishonest people to live off the labors of others. For example,
almost everyone agrees that we should help the disabled, but now drug abuse,
obesity, fake illnesses, and fake injuries qualify people as "disabled",
entitled to a permanent check from other taxpayers.What Romney was
implying is that we have a large number of such people who will automatically
vote Democrat in order to keep the money flowing their way.
The rich get richer, poor get poorer... so what, if the rich complain about the
growing segment of poor? Take a look at the 47% (and growing). It's
obviously their own fault. Tax breaks for the rich have no impact on the Federal
deficit. Just ask Marie Antoinette!
While much of what was written here sounds good,it is the politicians and their
penchant to create another program to solve the problem, exacerbated by an
entitlement mentality and immoral behavior, that makes reform next to
impossible. Unless citizens, and more importantly, elected polticians,
understand the purpose and role of government, as enshrined in the constitution,
the words and problems will continue until a collapse. Social Security,
Medicare, Welfare, and a host of other government probrams were never meant to
be be sponsored by Government. Individuals, protected in their unalienable
rights, raising responsible and virtuous children, are the only protections for
a social compact that the writer envisions. Anything less is the paternalistic
viewpoint of corrupt men seeking power, something our government is quite
prepared to place on a pedestal and use to deny others their property, rights,
and their choice, none of which are American ideals! I commend the author for
his desire to help, but there is only one thing each of us can do; start making
marraige, family, and work count for something!
Ultra Bob, I'm waiting for you come out and tell me what you really Want,
since you seem ambivalent or fearful of what it is that will replace and make
sure the all Americans benefit from America's prosperity? It is obvious
that you don't believe our current system does that. What is your plan!
Because, to be sure, we have a choice about the economic system that history has
already proven to be the best. Communish, Socialism, and fascism are proven
failures? What do you propose?
The article spoke of the 47%. Some are extremely wealthy too. Where is GE,
EXXON, and others who pay no taxes and receive Washington welfare. Capital
Gains should be taxed as unearned income, which it is. It's also a job
killer. Why?Every dollar tied up in the stock market and other investment
instruments denies one dollar in the economy buying products and services and
creating jobs. VP Cheney had the right idea, he encouraged POTUS to borrow
money (after spending the surplus) to pay for tax cuts and two wars. Every
borrowed dollar has a multiplier effect because it passes through so many hands:
bank loans, developers, designers, manufacturers, wholesalers, distributors,
retailers and consumer who have jobs to start the cycle over again and again.You do not get that kind of action with a dollar sitting in the market.
The only action there is trading stocks like bubblegum cards.
Here is my reform.Ditch the entitlements, and get people a motivational
book on how to get out of bed.
Giving Romney any credibility for his statements is extremely gratuitous. The
editorial board misses the point and the reason for the fallout of Romney's
comments. What he said was that "there are 47 percent who are with him
(Obama), who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims,
who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them...These are
people who pay no income taxes" This is a class warfare statement on
steroids. The Editorial Board would like to edit his comments by adding the
word "federal income taxes", because without it the Romney quote is way
off. How about the retired who pays no federal taxes but worked 45 or so years
and now receive social security supplemented with some savings. Or how about
college students who borrow 100,000 dollars or more for medical or law school.
Or how about the large families with lower incomes, like many in Utah. How
about the single parent who is raising children or a child. Are these examples
some of the reasons why we need entitlement reform. Lets make sure our
statistical facts are right to start with.
I don't get how we have plenty of billions to hand out to Egypt, Libya,
Iraq, and Afghanistan but we can't afford to educate, clothe, or feed our
own people? HUH?
@ Say No to BO:Who has proposed more costly programs?
@Hellooo:"through extensive pandering the Democrat party has
locked in "approximately" 47% of the vote"You're
very poorly informed."Romney is simply recognizing this fact and
noting that to win he has to get those that are not locked in to this President
no matter what and get them to vote for him"If he were simply
recognizing, and describing, a "fact," he wouldn't be nearly as
terrified of the consequences as he, and pretty much every respectable
Republican commentator, very clearly are about what he said. Why do you think
he's doing everything but stand on his hand to take it all back? Some kind
of big liberal plot maybe? Against "facts?"
To Kent DeForrest,re: "The system is designed at its most
fundamental level to pay one group (the owners and managers of capital) as much
as possible while paying another group (wage laborers) as little as possible.
This is why labor productivity is so important to businesses and why they ship
jobs off to Third World countries."This is a sophomoric attempt
at economics that misdiagnoses causality and oversimplifies. There is not
enough room in this forum to fully address the fallacies of your argument. But
here is a brief response:Labor intensive tasks are being shipped
overseas because 1) the massive wage gap that emerged over long periods of time
between developed and undeveloped nations. 2) Increased trade which removed
barriers to the market functioning 3) Increased capital stock in less developed
nations which allowed their labor productivity to rise to competitive levels.Returns flow to the scarcest resources. The opening of third world
labor and manufacturing markets made these resources abundant at the same time
the shift to a knowledge based economy accelerated. The return to highly
skilled intellectual capital has also skyrocketed as these skills became
globally leverageable. These are the real drivers.
To Kent DeForrest:The best way to address the growing gap between
rich and poor is education. The poor lack the skills most in demand in the
global marketplace (math, science, computer programming, communication and
writing skills, etc.). Many have also learned poor behaviors that hinder there
ability to make ends meet. Some of it is not their fault, per se, but that is
not the point.Those born to middle and upper-class families learn
everything from academic to social and emotional skills that help them become
successful. While some on the right point to work ethic and risk taking, these
are a small part of the problem in most cases. The most valuable of
intellectual capital is the hardest to teach and to learn. One thing the right
is correct in? The more we force equality in outcome, the more difficult it
will be for those who work hard and sacrifice to get ahead. And as this
incentive is destroyed, so will the entrepreneurism and and freedom at the core
of American values be destroyed.
To Henry Drummod:Capital Gain taxes are gains made from money that has already
been taxed at income tax rates. You might argue that we should increase the
rate of this second tax, but you need to also consider the effect that such
would have on putting such money at risk, by investin into these ventues. With
every capital investment, there are many that turn into losses, rather than
Anybody who thinks that Romney has a disdain for the needy don't know this
man, his heart, his contributions to charity and the working class, and his
desire to bring personal responsibility back to America. He's not going to
take help away from the retired, the disabled, the truly needy. But, he will
make those who are capable of working get off government dole and contribute to
their own upkeep and the welfare of society. Look at his achievements and
compare them to where obama is taking this country, that is if you can face
reality. If you can't, just keep whining and spinning words to fit your
agenda, like the MSM constantly does.Now, DN, you give good talking points
but refuse to take a stand against our out-of-control federal government, and
Bush's/Obama's reckless spending. Government created this mess, and
they need to be held accountable for what's happening.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments