Quantcast

Comments about ‘Letter: President Obama is worst choice for America's youth’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Sept. 29 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ECR
Burke, VA

One man sells another man a used car. Despite being used the car looks good and the brand name is respected throughout the industry. But the first man doesn't tell the man whose buying the car that the brakes are faulty and the steering mechanism is having problems. The two men shake on the deal and the second man drives away. He hardly gets down the street when the brakes fail and when he tries to steer out of the way of trouble, the steering fails also. The first man sees the accident and surveys the damage and says "That guy wasn't much of a driver, was he?"

Such is the reasoning behind this letter writer's conclusion. President Obama inherited an economy that was killing 700,000 jobs a month leaving us with 10% unemployment. That fact and the fact that we had given back $3 trillion in tax revenue through a tax break mainly benefiting the rich, implemented an unfunded prescription drug benefit and fought two wars meant that we had more expenses than ever before and less revenue than recent decades. And the writer blames all of this on the current president. Typical Republican thinking

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

From the tone of the comment one can intuit that the letter writer is not of the generation he advises that the President is "the worst choice for America's youth". If the youth are old enough to vote, they are certainly able to make a judgement on who is they are going to vote for without help from their elders. Surely anyone can see that there is room for a difference of opinion on the issue and the matter is not (pardon the pun) black or white.

Esquire
Springville, UT

Sorry, sir, but the debt was not caused by the President. Perhaps more culpable are the people of Utah who constantly have their hands out to the federal government, and I'm betting you are one of them. Or the Congress that is more interested in the politics of destruction and has sought to obstruct every effort of the President. Or the last Administration which took us into two wars without a way to pay for it. Or the biggest recession in 70 years which is affecting not only the U. S., but also the world. Perhaps we could consider whether the opponent is any better, but he is secretive about his past and his policies. Is he a better example to our youth when he cannot define and stick to a set of principles beyond his personal desire to be president?

liberal larry
salt lake City, utah

A new low for DNews letters?

Eric Samuelsen
Provo, UT

Yep, this is the winner. The silliest letter this political season. The most fact-free, the most ignorance of the economy and of recent history. We have a winner.

one old man
Ogden, UT

What is wrong with people like this writer?

Are they completely incapable of seeking TRUTH when it is so easily available?

It's not available over AM radio air waves.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Do we blame the Fire Depatmnet for the high cost putting out the Fire [Obama],

or

Do we blame the arsonist who lit it on fire, and played a fiddle while showing his Corporate Friends with gold and sent the Fire Department to the otherside of the world? [Bush]

Sorry - but when looking at reality, I don't buy into the Republican lies.

BTW -- Those young people, working 2 part-time minimum pay jobs, with no insurance, going to college --- ya, those are the lazy victim leeaches of the low-life 47% Mitt Romney slammed who be the Doctors, Lawyers and Engineers of tomorrow.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

People act like Obama did nothing to compound the problems in America. He stared by spending a trillion dollars on a stimulus package that DID NOT WORK. The CBO told us that each job "created" cost over $250,000. He seized G.M. and Chrysler, paid $49 BILLION out of the public treasury for G.M. and then gave the company to the unions. Recently, a financial magazine told us that G.M. will be bankrupt within four years. Obama paid people to NOT work, then he stopped counting them as unemployed after their two years of handouts stopped!

None of those things were Bush's fault. Obama did all of that by himself.

That first $1 trillion was just a start. He added another $4 TRILLION to the deficit. He blames Bush. Why doesn't he blame FDR and LBJ who started the programs that are bankrupting us. Yet, he wants to add to their mess with Obamacare. He wants 18% of our money to be thrown into the public treasury with a "promise" that he will give us aspirin and birth control pills in return.

Obama is the master of his mess he deserves ALL the "credit".

The Real Maverick
Orem, UT

More ranting.

No solutions.

That's the GOP way!

ugottabkidn
Sandy, UT

Come on Richards, get in the game, or should I say get back in the game. For someone that touts the Constitution you sure miss alot. The stimulus DID WORK though it was too small because you have a group of congressional capos that have vowed to destroy the POTUS at any cost like your friend Lee. Time to turn Beck off in get out of Disneyland.

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

Reagan's policies caused most of the current debt. Reagan's debt was never paid then both Bushes just continued his horrible policies.
During Bush II the economy collapsed and Obama has just been trying to rebuild it.
This is Obama's fault, how?

Anti Bush-Obama
Washington, DC

I personally see no difference between Romney and Obama. America will be screwed either way.

The youth wanted Ron Paul. They definatley have more wisdom than the previous generation. If we care about the youth, why don't we listen to them?

Blue
Salt Lake City, UT

"The youth wanted Ron Paul."

Maybe, but I doubt it.

But if they truly do "want Ron Paul," then it's exactly the same way my eight year old granddaughter wants a pony.

Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

It has been stated time and time again, "What is this guy saying?"

Okay, many people don't know history. Many people refuse to read news articles on subjects they don't like for whatever reason? Some people only listen to certain radio and television commentators until they are filled to capacity with the pablum they have been fed. Many people are influenced more by those of like-mind than go to the trouble of critically analyzing what they are told. Many people are simple ideologs who cannot tolerate any dissenting opinion to that they say they believe.

On a recent Sunday news program, Bay Buchanan kept saying the "Obama is ruining America" like it was her personal duty to repeat ad naseum as if it were an incantation to the political spirits to make others believe her. The other conservative speakers on the panal could only lower their heads in apparent embarassment. Like her brother, Patrick, this woman has a message of doom and was hard-pressed, like Chicken Little, to get anyone to listen to her.

Some old man telling young people that "Obama is bad for your future" only serves to turn them off.

J Thompson
SPRINGVILLE, UT

@ugottabkidn,

Why not take the time to Google "cbo stimulus cost per job" before telling us that the stimulus spending was worthwhile?

What company would spend $4.1 million per employee? For that matter, what company would pay even $250,000 per employee?

That's what Obama did. It's history. You can't change it by making some absurd comment that the stimulus spending helped.

Maybe it's also time for the liberals to admit that DEMOCRATS are wealthier than Republicans:

"Democrats constantly accuse the Republican Party as being the party of “wealth and privilege,” while selling themselves as the party of the “common man.”

Yet the facts paint an entirely different picture.

According to labor statistics, in “blue” states with a majority of Democrats, the average income is $100,000. While in “red” states with a majority of Republicans, the average income is $30,000."

The Democrats need to open their wallets and "give back" something worth more than their hollow rhethoric. They constantly lie about "rich Republicans" while hiding that fact that the Democrats hold the wealth in America.

Noodlekaboodle
Salt Lake City, UT

Ok, I'm in the generation that we are discussing in this letter. There are a couple of reasons most the people I know won't support Mitt. The social issue card the Republicans used to attract the AARP vote is now backfiring on them. 20 somethings are pretty solidly in the pro gay marriage camp (or they just don't care if gay people get married) and they also believe that you should have the choice to get an abortion. They also don't believe religion should be brought into politics. So pretty much the average 20 something is diametrically opposed to the social platform of the republican party.

Nate
Pleasant Grove, UT

Obama *is* the worst choice for America's youth. The employer mandate under Obamacare, along with other new regulations, has killed the job market. Unemployment for the millennial generation is about double what it is for everyone else. The student loan bubble is about to break.

Which means that the demographic that got Obama elected is being harmed the worst by his policies. They face a future of food stamps, and living in their parents' basement. They won't be so enthusiastic about Obama this time around.

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

"Why not take the time to Google "cbo stimulus cost per job" "

Okay, Thompson.

"Right-wing media are using a new report from the Congressional Budget Office to claim that the stimulus "may have cost as much as $4.1 million per job." However, simply dividing the amount of money spent by the number of jobs created is, according to an Associated Press fact check, "highly misleading," and economist Paul Krugman has called this math "bogus." Conservative media regularly use similar calculations to attack jobs initiatives."-New Stimulus Report, Same Bogus Cost-Per-Job Analysis From Right-Wing Media, Mediamatters, May 31, 2012, Chelsea Rudman

"Beware the math. Some Republican lawmakers critical of President Barack Obama's stimulus package are using grade-school arithmetic to size up costs and consequences of all that spending. The math is satisfyingly simple but highly misleading.
It goes like this: Divide the stimulus money spent so far by the estimated number of jobs saved or created. That produces a rather frightening figure on how much money taxpayers are spending for each job.
[...]
The reality is more complex."- ibid

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

First, the naysayers' calculations ignore the value of the work produced.
Any cost-per-job figure pays not just for the worker, but for material, supplies and that worker's output -- a portion of a road paved, patients treated in a health clinic, goods shipped from a factory floor, railroad tracks laid.
Second, critics are counting the total cost of contracts that will fuel work for months or years and dividing that by the number of jobs produced only to date.
A construction project, for one, may only require a few engineers to get going, with the work force to swell as ground is broken and building accelerates.
Hundreds of such projects have been on the books, in which the full value of the contracts is already counted in the spending totals, but few or no jobs have been reported yet because the work is only getting started.
To flip the equation politically, it's as if the 10-year cost of George W. Bush's big tax cuts were compared with the benefits to the economy that only accrued during the first year.-ibid

mark
Salt Lake City, UT

Third, the package approved by Congress is aimed at more than direct job creation, although employment was certainly central to its promotion and purpose.
Its features include money for research, training, plant equipment, extended unemployment benefits, credit assistance for businesses and more -- spending meant to pay off over time but impossible to judge in a short-term job formula.
Nor do the estimates made Friday include indirect employment already created by the package -- difficult if not impossible to measure. [AP, 11/2/09, via Nexis]-ibid

First, there's the bogus talking point that the Obama plan will cost $275,000 per job created. Why is it bogus? Because it involves taking the cost of a plan that will extend over several years, creating millions of jobs each year, and dividing it by the jobs created in just one of those years.-Krugman- ibid

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments