President Barack Obama giving his State of the Union address.
What I remember of the past four years is: Climategate, a slumping economy, stagnant job growth, nationalized healthcare, a failed Cash for Clunkers program, lowering national credit statuses, Fast and Furious, and Benghazi.
President Obama’s memory seems a bit different, as his State of the Union Address focused on blame shifting, preschool, minimum wages, green energy, and a war on AIDs. Who knows how these will solve the problems I remember.
The President mentioned a slew of other topics, but I’ll focus on the most relevant and frequently mentioned.
Obama often invoked bipartisanship noting that both parties agreed to this or that and therefore there should be no issue passing bills in favor of said topic.
This assumes a lot. And everyone knows what happens when we assume.
The conservatives in the Republican Party have been largely ignored by party leadership and there currently is a political civil war amongst them. Assuming any issue as non-partisan places conservatives in a lose-lose situation. If they vote no on a bill, they are accused of being partisan racists. While if they vote yes, they alienate a large portion of America.
I won’t pretend that claiming bipartisanship is anything more than winning moderate Republicans to his side while demonizing the conservative Republicans. It’s a genius political strategy, but nothing more.
The mess we have now wasn’t just Republicans’ fault however.
Whether it’s requiring universities to magically lower their costs, subsidizing preschools, or packing technical degrees into high school programs; Obama wants to subsidize, or enforce laws forcing institutions to pay for lower prices on education.
If he believes so strongly that government can help people gain an education, why not use School Choice? Subsidize the student not the school if you think the government can fix the problem.
Being from Detroit I know there are kids who’d love an opportunity to go to a private school but can’t afford it. We just need to stop subsidizing the schools and give the kids vouchers instead, so that they can afford to go where they want.
But teachers’ unions refuse salary cuts; and they make large electoral contributions.
Another voting block that Obama pandered to was the poor. Raising the minimum wage will encourage hiring freezes. Companies will hire half as many people, or fire even more workers.
This leads to fewer jobs in market. Fewer jobs mean that college educated workers will have to settle for lower paying jobs which will leave even more lower-income workers without employment. Raising the minimum wage only exacerbates the problem, it can’t fix it.
I don’t see how pandering to the FFA by subsidizing corn farmers will help either. Rises in food prices will only further burden the American people.
And clearly there were no references to Ambassador Stevens or the current position of Obama’s administration to use drones to kill American’s without a fair trial.
Overall, I can’t understand how people see President Obama’s proposals as solutions to our problems. But then again I can’t see why people like Kim Kardashian and Snooki either.
For a different take read this.
—SPONSORED AD—
Sounds like you’ve been watching a lot of Fox News
but you’re completely right on raising the Minimum Wage. And school choice. Lots of positives and negatives to Obama’s first term and SOTU address. Balanced approach to climate change, continuing to boost slow economy along, and maybe the bipartisan immigration proposal(please Utah Congressmen, don’t screw up this bipartisan legislation!) seem to be some measures of hope.
The only show I watch with any regularity on Fox News is Redeye with Greg Gutfeld.
Bro.
With all due respect, your economic analysis is more than a little shoddy.
Countless economic studies find that modest, incremental increases in the minimum wage do not adversely affect employment rates, especially. We’re talking about a proposed $1.75 hike in the federal minimum wage over two years. That is not a large or sudden increase by any stretch of the imagination.
Furthermore, as Henry Ford (one of the most successful capitalists in history) would gladly tell ya, putting more money into the hands of the working poor and middle class will IMPROVE employment in the long run. See, employment is contingent upon demand for what a company supplies. The more demand for a product, the more incentive a company has to increase production. In fact, companies NEVER increase production unless it is to meet heightened demand, no matter how many tax breaks you give them. So, if you want to boost employment, you must boost demand for goods. How does one do this? By putting more money into the hands of those who are most likely to spend it (the working poor and middle class).
I also take issue with your criticism of Obama’s “pandering to the poor.” If by pandering you mean acknowledge their plight and bring forth real, substantive proposals to improve their situation, then I suppose he did pander to them.
And, like the comment above says, your synopsis of the Obama Presidency is highly suggestive of a little too much Fox News. Or Drudge Report or National Review.
Much love
I’d like to see some of these studies. Could you post a link or two. Also I stand by what I said that in regards to wage floors being bad for the poor. Its a fact that floors on apartments have only hurt the poor.
Also I don’t think its fair to infer that I disagree with Obama’s proposals on how to help the poor that I’m in some way not acknowledging their problems.
And one last thing. Even if I did (and I don’t) often look to Fox or Drudge doesn’t in and of itself indicate that one should chalk up any idea I proposed as right wing talking points.
you can find links for studies on that here- http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/labor/news/2012/06/20/11749/the-facts-on-raising-the-minimum-wage-when-unemployment-is-high-2/
not sure if those were the ones ian had in mind, but they prove his point.
Thanks. I’ll check them out. Oh I liked your article by the way.
Bro.
With all due respect you analysis is more than a little shoddy.
Show some proof of some of these “countless studies” you mention, or don’t mention them. And just because you get all of your information from liberal news outlets and have never learned to think for yourself, does not mean that everyone else struggles from the same ineptitude.
As for the government mandating that minimum wages go up, try turning off what you hear from MSNBC news and think about it logically. If wages go up where does that money come from? You have already proven that you don’t know, so I will tell you; they come from either the business owner’s pocket, or they cut into the company’s profits. That means that the company will either go out of business or it will raise the cost of it’s product/service to customers to offset the sudden increase in their costs. These rising prices mostly offset the benefit the poor get from higher wages, doing nothing to increase their standard of living. Try studying this out a bit on your own, or even take a class in Macroeconomics before you claim to know anything about the issue.
Much love
Matt J: Whether or not you consider your diatribe to be right wing talking points, it sure sounds like right wing talking points. Climategate? A well-known right winger once said that extremism in defense of freedom was no vice. Some of us would say that “extremism” in defense of the planet we live on is no vice. A slumping economy and stagnant job growth? I’m not sure where you have been or where you get your info. The economy is recovering not slumpling and has been for several years. Job growth is positive not stagnant. Neither has been robust but both are on the right track. Considering that Obama has had to fight Republicans every step of the way. With a little cooperation, the economy could most likely be bustling. Nationalized health care? “Obamacare” is not a health care program. It helps provide insurance for those who do not currently have it. Cash for Clunkers? YOU say it failed. You have no proof. Cash for Clunkers was part of a plan to help the auto industry recover. The American auto industry is alive and well. SOMETHING worked. If you don’t know that the lowering of the nation’s credit rating was 100% on congressional Republicans, you are just ignoring facts. Fast and Furious. Certainly a really, really bad idea. Do you really think that either Bush or Obama was aware of that mess before it became public? I think not. Benghazi? The only point you make that might have some basis in fact. Some day we will know the whole story. You state that the mess we now have is not just the Republicans’ fault. This is true but our situation is LARGELY due to Republican policy, actions taken while Bush was the President and Republicans controlled Congress. Matt, if you don’t want your comments to sound like right wing talking points don’t use words like “pander”. You will be taken to be just another right wing crackpot and we all know that’s not true. Don’t we? Maybe?
You shouldn’t respond to things online when you’re angry. It’ll just ruin your day.
1. Your mentioning of extremism when talking about Climategate was logically fallacious. Instead of explaining why the hacked emails from the CRU are quite clear that all evidence of climate change in their models was basically made up, you just say that it was in defense of our planet therefore it was ok. Which it isn’t. A lie is a lie,
2. I’m from Detroit. I get my information from what I see around me. And let me tell you coming from a city where progressive liberals have been in control for years and years that these programs go nowhere we want to go.
3. The use of the word Healthcare was Obama’s decision not mine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1YNF9I25yU
4. It did fail. It was supposed to have enough money for a year and went bankrupt after a month. That sounds like a failure to me.
5. If you think the auto industry is alive and well you have never been to Detroit.
6. Would you like to back up your facts on your claim that our credit slump is due to Republicans? Because I’m pretty sure we can both agree it started with all the house loans that failed. And that was due to Clinton’s administration forcing banks to give loans to people who couldn’t afford them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314
7. In regards to Fast and Furious I could say yes I that those who were “in the know” were probably high enough up where Obama could and should rightly take the blame.
The last thing I will say is I would love to see you show me actual evidence of your self-proclaimed facts. Just saying “nu-uh” every time I mention something does not discredit what I’ve said.
I look forward to looking into the evidence that you give me. However, if your next comment is simply stating the opposite of what I said without providing evidence I will simply ignore the comment.
Thanks for commenting.
Strong words from a harbinger of a dying political party. Analysis from a Whig would be just as enlightening.
I don’t know what you’re talking about. Libertarianism is on the rise.
I’m still waiting for someone who can offer more than the critical theorist tactics. None of what you said discredits the points that I’ve made. Keep at it though.
Thanks for the comment.