The Hijacked Presidency
“Now is not the time to be making a profit” was a line from a speech from President Barack Obama that included disgracing corporate CEOs for being successful. The arbitrary “Maginot line” of selfishness had now been placed at a half million-dollars in salary.
But where does a national prosperity come from? Does it come from the “trickle down” massive government spending into the private sector, or does it come from the winning American businesses via “can do spirit,” innovation, and ingenuity?
In the past, America has lead the world in many fields of endeavor, by getting there first, building a better mousetrap, inventing entire industries, or simply doing something better.
We built a railroad across an entire continent. We developed weapons and aviation systems that won world wars. We sent men to the moon and safely back again, and developed the personal computer.
Along the way, large companies that competed against one another for contracts, such as DuPont, General Electric, Northrop, and so many others thrived. The risks they took made employees wealthy.
Now, in this age of President Obama, we are a fully mature “service economy,” marked by many small companies that do well in specific niches of business. Many of the business owners made over $250,000 in income for themselves along the way while employing five to 50 or so, at least during the good times.
Computer services companies, the construction trades, and advertising agencies are examples of this category of business.
Is this not the American Dream? To succeed on your own, be rewarded in a proportional way for taking risk, while bringing living wages to others along the way?
But our new president believes that it is evil to make $250,000 a year, and that this arbitrary amount makes one “rich.”
The “Robin Hood” in Barack Obama comes out now. We take from the rich to give to the poor…
Conflicting actions taken now to “fix the economy” will do so at the expense of the successful, and to the disproportionate benefit of the cyclical entitlement class.
This “hijacked presidency,” which once promised to focus on saving the middle class and the creation of jobs, is demonizing the only sector of our economy that can possibly “grow our way out” of our current problems without a provable plan.
The new promised taxation of the upper levels will kill the golden goose, while proceeds – one could almost say “spoils” – will make their way in convoluted fashion to those making bad decisions, overspending, and speculating in the housing market.
And, what about the coordination of a common economic policy? How can we possibly simultaneously: deficit-spend our way out of an economic meltdown, burden those expected to grow businesses, cut our national debt in half over the next three years, and set up a national healthcare system, all at the same time as we cut taxes for “95% of all Americans?”
I am not an economist, but this does not all add up, and it has not been proven even as good theory on paper.
One announcement from the week has been that a portion of the proposed 2010 budget will be funds to be set-aside, of large magnitude, toward starting the national healthcare proposition. How do you set-aside something that is borrowed in the first place!
Will we really save enough money by putting medical records on the Internet to make this all work? Who would want to endure medical school now, as income for doctors is sure to nose dive? Will the elderly patients pay the price of finding economy in medical treatments: Just how much is it worth to extend the lifespan of a human being by two years? Yes, this is on the table in the new plan.
So much is left unanswered…
We will not get out of our current economic morass by investing in green technology and by finding new ways of fighting global warming? These are not items that improve efficiency or increase productivity; quite the opposite, they have end-goals of serving the perceived needs of a constituency for reasons of political payback and correctness.
Will a system of carbon-credits and carbon offsets, and the resulting residual markets for these save the economy? This in a very ill conceived payback to tree hugging liberals. I think not.
It should have been simple:
*The economic plans should show each and every line item tied directly to a “public benefit chart” showing exactly how many jobs would be created or saved for each. For example: Saving the field mice in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s district.
*The economic plans should have a time-line for each element of the plan, and a comprehensive explanation of how the conflicting elements would resolve each other, and the result.
*For every dollar spent to bail out a bank like CITI, or a mortgage broker for ACORN, or car company like Chrysler, show me a new check and balance system with transparency, to keep the new money going the way of the bad…
*Since the only way to possibly stave-off inflationary pressures during this period of blind spending madness is to grow our way out of it – hopefully without having to force a wartime economy – show me the incentive to that small businessman to get back to an income of $250,000 in a good year.
In this last example, the likelihood of financial success is being advertised as getting one’s head chopped off!
Maybe these are just the new laws of the jungle in this Nottingham Forest of our Robin Hood president.
But this is all not as it had been promised during the campaign cycle.
It seems like our promised presidency has been hijacked.
Somebody call a cop!