Is Obama making sense?

[valentino]

Obama wants to raise debt ceiling $2.6t.I know about the passage of the bill.However we are on the brink of default because were at $14t.He wants to raise it to$16.6t which would us in bigger trouble.How does he plan on getting us back to below the $14t and then gradually getting lower?He talks about increasing taxes on $250th and above wage earners and closing the tax loopholes plus cutting subsities.But all of that would only be maybe a 20% reduction of the budget.Infrastructure would cost more money at least in the short term.And the programs he allows to cut would bring in very little.So how does he possibly see us cutting the deficit?where is the money going to come from?How can he think by investing in the future is going to save us when are deficit keeps gettting bigger?Is this all smoke and mirrors?If im right in what im saying how can anybody vote for him from either party?

 

[Dan_Daly]

Why do you think Obama wants to cut the budget or the debt?

He (or his successors) will eventually run out of money that can be borrowed from other countries. How will they attempt to get funds then? Nationalization of private business perhaps. I know awhile back the administration floated the idea of siezing private 401ks. Maybe foreign conquest- funny how nobody screams “BLOOD FOR OIL” about Libya

Bottom line- how will Obama get more money? Anyway he thinks he can get away with.

Pax.

 

[karebear92]

Obama wants to raise debt ceiling $2.6t.I know about the passage of the bill.However we are on the brink of default because were at $14t.He wants to raise it to$16.6t which would us in bigger trouble.How does he plan on getting us back to below the $14t and then gradually getting lower?He talks about increasing taxes on $250th and above wage earners and closing the tax loopholes plus cutting subsities.But all of that would only be maybe a 20% reduction of the budget.Infrastructure would cost more money at least in the short term.And the programs he allows to cut would bring in very little.So how does he possibly see us cutting the deficit?where is the money going to come from?How can he think by investing in the future is going to save us when are deficit keeps gettting bigger?Is this all smoke and mirrors?If im right in what im saying how can anybody vote for him from either party?

No it is not just smoke and mirrors. It may not work, but his economic plan is not a scheme or a conspiracy or anything of that sort. His belief is that if he invests in the future, especially in energy, we will become more energy independent. If we become a leader in production and innovation our economy will grow richer, and more taxes from corporations and citizens will bring more money into the government and shrink the deficit. It is the opposite philosophy of Republicans. Republicans believe that by cutting spending we will save money, which makes logical sense, but it may also hurt the federal programs that are (arguably) needed. It is just two different philosophies. In my opinion, neither one is perfect. In fact, I would say both are heavily flawed. They made a compromise, but it wan’t a great one. In reality the Republicans probably should have given a little bit more. I don’t believe a two-party system will serve America to its full potential. Sorry for the rant, and this is all a very simplified version of reality.

God bless!

 

[Dan_Daly]

His belief is that if he invests in the future, especially in energy, we will become more energy independent.

A few issues with this- how can a President, who has never worked in the fields of geology, energy, or business and is insulated by a web of beuarcracy make wiser investment decisions for an entire nation, then the wealth of folks who actually work in those fields and know what they are doing?

Secondly, if he wants to boost domestic energy production what is up with the increased restrictions he’s placed on oil drilling and promising to bankrupt anyone who opens a new coal fired power plant.

 

[karebear92]

A few issues with this- how can a President, who has never worked in the fields of geology, energy, or business and is insulated by a web of beuarcracy make wiser investment decisions for an entire nation, then the wealth of folks who actually work in those fields and know what they are doing?

Secondly, if he wants to boost domestic energy production what is up with the increased restrictions he’s placed on oil drilling and promising to bankrupt anyone who opens a new coal fired power plant.

Because, as I said, the system is heavily flawed. It is not as if he has no advisors, though. He has advisors working in the area of geology, energy, and business. He is not just like “huh, this year I will invest in green energy or whatever, and, well, next year I will invest in cheese because I like cheese.” He believes that if the government invests it will spark immediate interest. I wasn’t trying to say that he is right; I was just saying that it is not a conspiracy or scheme. He truly believes that his plans will work best for America. It may not work, but I just don’t believe he is trying to harm America or anything of the sort.

 

[Dan_Daly]

I understand your point. Thanks for the clarification.

I will agree with you that the two party system does not serve us very well.

I will disagree that Obama is doing what he sincerely thinks is best for this country. I think he’s doing what most politicians, of both parties, usually do- what he sincererly thinks is best for getting reelected and growing in personal prestige/power.

Pax.

 

[karebear92]

I think he’s doing what most politicians, of both parties, usually do- what he sincererly thinks is best for getting reelected and growing in personal prestige/power.

Pax.

True, but I honestly don’t think they fully understand the difference, as odd as that sounds. I truly believe they play the political game to get their party re-elected, but I also think that they believe their party is what is best for the country. I think the fact that my life is treated as a game to them makes me most angry. Like the debate today was okay and everything, but I just felt like it was very juvenile. It took them ten minutes to calm down and stop talking and then the one representative continued with her tantrum like it was no big deal. I just don’t like how our country is run and who runs it. They are just too full of themselves.

The best thing I saw today was that Gabrielle Gifford voted humbly despite everything that she has been through. That was encouraging.

 

[puzzleannie]

Obama wants to raise debt ceiling $2.6t.?

of course it makes sense. every American knows what to do when you are deeply in debt and about to go bankrupt–keep spending and borrow more money. That is why they banks send preapproved credit cards all the time. What is the matter with you? are you not patriotic? have you abandoned American values?:tsktsk:

 

[ANNE_2]

Catholics can NOT vote for Obama.
As the ‘boss’ of all US Govenment Administration, he supports the moral decline of our Country through: Abortion, Gay Marriage, and suppression of religious freedom through his agencies.
He is a socialist and student of Saul Alinsky.
He is not protecting our borders from drug runners, murderers, and sexual slavery traders.

Examples:

1. Not actively prosecuting BATF agents for supplying guns to Mexican Drug Lords, and not protecting the border so that States must take action into their own hands.
2. His appointee Sec of State, Hillary Clinton fighting for abortion and contraception at United Nations, and tying financial aid to support of these sins.
3. His executive order overturning the ban on US taxpayer funding of international family planning groups that provide abortion (Mexico City Policy).
4. His Health and Human Services agency trying to force Catholic hospitals out of business if they do not perform abortions and sterilizations and dispense contraceptives.
5. His strong support for homosexual indoctrination through the Dept of Education, in the military, etc., has lead to the closing of Catholic adoption agencies who will not provide babies to homosexuals in some States.
6. Economically - he has not proposed getting rid of any government waste;
   has been growing the Federal Government and stifling the economy through regulation and preventing US industry from developing our own energy resources - not drilling in the Gulf, not drilling in Alaska, stopping natural gas through new regs, stopping coal through new regulation, etc.
7. His appointment of a homosexual and pro-abortionist to the US Supreme Court (with his Party’s approval).

 

[starsmurf]

A few issues with this- how can a President, who has never worked in the fields of geology, energy, or business and is insulated by a web of beuarcracy make wiser investment decisions for an entire nation, then the wealth of folks who actually work in those fields and know what they are doing?

Secondly, if he wants to boost domestic energy production what is up with the increased restrictions he’s placed on oil drilling and promising to bankrupt anyone who opens a new coal fired power plant.

He has these advisors who tell him about it. He is a very intelligent man. He listens to their advice and then makes decisions.

He wants to porduce energy with methods that do not involve fossil fuels like oil or coal. This is extremely clever. Which countries are really rich at the moment? The ones that have oil. If the US becomes a world leader in producing cars that don’t run on gas, solar panels etc, then it will become very rich. The oil is running out. As it becomes more and more scarce and expensive, the countires that can offer alternatives and whose own power supply systems and economies don’t rely on oil will be the winners.

If the US continues to rely on oil, within twenty years, it will be well below India and China in the economic and influence stakes. Alternative energy sources are the only way to keep the USA a superpower. Or do you want to be a vassal state of China?

 

[MarisaJean]

Weather we agree or disagree with his decisions he is the president. I can’t imagine having the weight on an entire country on me 24-7. He has two different groups arguing for different things constantly. He came into office when things were terrible and it’s his job to help get things turned back around. This cannot be done overnight and sometimes not over years. People need to vote across the board rep or dem because this is how things don’t get done quickly in Washington because we vote a dem president but rep in other catagories. The fact of the matter is yes he is a dem and yes he hold some different values then most catholic people do, but there are somethings he does fight for which might help alot of us such as low income families and immigration reform. There are so many issues that need to be addressed but they must be done one at a time with both parties compromising. We are not people to bash another mans work. We as catholics may think different but we as Americans must stand behind our president. He is doing the best he can with the situation he was delt.

 

[Scoobyshme]

Obama’s plan from the start was to bankrupt the country, scrap the Constitution, and replace it with some form of Marxism. He’s ahead of schedule, so far. Goodbye freedom.

 

[meltzerboy]

Obama wants to raise debt ceiling $2.6t.I know about the passage of the bill.However we are on the brink of default because were at $14t.He wants to raise it to$16.6t which would us in bigger trouble.How does he plan on getting us back to below the $14t and then gradually getting lower?He talks about increasing taxes on $250th and above wage earners and closing the tax loopholes plus cutting subsities.But all of that would only be maybe a 20% reduction of the budget.Infrastructure would cost more money at least in the short term.And the programs he allows to cut would bring in very little.So how does he possibly see us cutting the deficit?where is the money going to come from?How can he think by investing in the future is going to save us when are deficit keeps gettting bigger?Is this all smoke and mirrors?If im right in what im saying how can anybody vote for him from either party?

Obama hopes to get us out of the deficit by growing the economy through investments in, for example, new technology. In my and others’ view, this is not smoke and mirrors but sound economic policy. To implement this, however, he must avoid the tendency to over-tax and over-regulate business. Still, some regulations, particularly on big business, are needed to offset the dangers of corporate monopolization and greed. The Republicans, on the other hand, believe that business taxes and regulations should be avoided at all costs, because they often have an adverse effect on economic growth and employment by limiting private competition, which for them holds the key to economic recovery. They also believe in instituting structural reform changes in government, such as the privatization of entitlement programs. (In some ways, Conservatives are less status quo than Liberals.) These are two different economic philosophies with a different focus, both of which may lead to long-term financial solutions but also carry with them potential hazards, if not implemented judiciously.

 

[Carlan]

Obama hopes to get us out of the deficit by growing the economy through investments in, for example, new technology. In my and others’ view, this is not smoke and mirrors but sound economic policy. To implement this, however, he must avoid the tendency to over-tax and over-regulate business. Still, some regulations, particularly on big business, are needed to offset the dangers of corporate monopolization and greed. The Republicans, on the other hand, believe that business taxes and regulations should be avoided at all costs, because they often have an adverse effect on economic growth and employment by limiting private competition, which for them holds the key to economic recovery. They also believe in instituting structural reform changes in government, such as the privatization of entitlement programs. (In some ways, Conservatives are less status quo than Liberals.) These are two different economic philosophies with a different focus, both of which may lead to long-term financial solutions but also carry with them potential hazards, if not implemented judiciously.

hmmm yes,why can’t common sense reasoning be practiced by all of us? An intelligent leader was elected to lead. He works to the best of his ability along with a very competent cabinet. Just imagine the immensity of it all and support the man, even tho’ many of you in the forums do not seem to relate to him with any credit or respect as the chosen leader of our nation. Peace, Carlan

 

[valentino]

No it is not just smoke and mirrors. It may not work, but his economic plan is not a scheme or a conspiracy or anything of that sort. His belief is that if he invests in the future, especially in energy, we will become more energy independent. If we become a leader in production and innovation our economy will grow richer, and more taxes from corporations and citizens will bring more money into the government and shrink the deficit. It is the opposite philosophy of Republicans. Republicans believe that by cutting spending we will save money, which makes logical sense, but it may also hurt the federal programs that are (arguably) needed. It is just two different philosophies. In my opinion, neither one is perfect. In fact, I would say both are heavily flawed. They made a compromise, but it wan’t a great one. In reality the Republicans probably should have given a little bit more. I don’t believe a two-party system will serve America to its full potential. Sorry for the rant, and this is all a very simplified version of reality.

God bless!

But don’t you see we can’t afford now to invest in anything.Our interest on the debt alone is costing us many billions.Everytime we increase the debt we also are paying more interest.Its like if you are starving.and have 100dollars in pocket.If you invest 20yrs.from now you’ll have $10th.But you’llstarve before you ever see your investment payoff.Our country is starving.We need money now.To invest means we have to borrow even more and add even more interest.

 

[karebear92]

But don’t you see we can’t afford now to invest in anything.Our interest on the debt alone is costing us many billions.Everytime we increase the debt we also are paying more interest.Its like if you are starving.and have 100dollars in pocket.If you invest 20yrs.from now you’ll have $10th.But you’llstarve before you ever see your investment payoff.Our country is starving.We need money now.To invest means we have to borrow even more and add even more interest.

I never said he was correct in economic policy. I was just saying that it is a policy and that it does make sense. President Obama doesn’t just come up with economic plans on his own. He isn’t a financial wizard. He does, however, have financial wizards working for him that understand economics far better than I do, and probably better than most, if not all, on CAF. Just as he has financial wizards that tell him to invest, there are others that say that it won’t work. Investing does make sense in that if they increase the debt ceiling, we hopeful won’t run out of funds, will invest, and hopefully the increased debt will sustain us until we become a leader in production, which will increase profits, and in turn, increase the amount of tax money collected by businesses and citizens. This would also prevent cutting from social programs. This, in my opinion, is a best of both worlds philosophy. It may work, but is very risky. It is like a doctor investing in college and medical school knowing they will be hundreds of thousand in debt, but may make hundreds of thousands in the future. It is logical, but it may not always work out.

Republicans want to cut spending. I agree that we need to cut spending, but to cut spending to the degree they want may be devastating to the poor. It really may. If they begin to cut pell grants and things of the sort, many deserving high school graduates may not be able to attend college and some elderly may struggle to make ends meet.

There needs to be a compromise, but Democrats propose their view and Republicans propose their view, but nobody is willing to meet in the middle. This compromise is supposed to do that, but they didn’t really compromise as much as they need to. The reason, I believe is the only way to fix it is to basically start from scratch. Medicaid is needed, but it is currently being abused to an extreme degree. I fear the two sides have grown so far apart that the current laws contradict one another to an unredeemable point.

 

[valentino]

I never said he was correct in economic policy. I was just saying that it is a policy and that it does make sense. President Obama doesn’t just come up with economic plans on his own. He isn’t a financial wizard. He does, however, have financial wizards working for him that understand economics far better than I do, and probably better than most, if not all, on CAF. Just as he has financial wizards that tell him to invest, there are others that say that it won’t work. Investing does make sense in that if they increase the debt ceiling, we hopeful won’t run out of funds, will invest, and hopefully the increased debt will sustain us until we become a leader in production, which will increase profits, and in turn, increase the amount of tax money collected by businesses and citizens. This would also prevent cutting from social programs. This, in my opinion, is a best of both worlds philosophy. It may work, but is very risky. It is like a doctor investing in college and medical school knowing they will be hundreds of thousand in debt, but may make hundreds of thousands in the future. It is logical, but it may not always work out.

Republicans want to cut spending. I agree that we need to cut spending, but to cut spending to the degree they want may be devastating to the poor. It really may. If they begin to cut pell grants and things of the sort, many deserving high school graduates may not be able to attend college and some elderly may struggle to make ends meet.

There needs to be a compromise, but Democrats propose their view and Republicans propose their view, but nobody is willing to meet in the middle. This compromise is supposed to do that, but they didn’t really compromise as much as they need to. The reason, I believe is the only way to fix it is to basically start from scratch. Medicaid is needed, but it is currently being abused to an extreme degree. I fear the two sides have grown so far apart that the current laws contradict one another to an unredeemable point.

Obama’s wizard’s have the same socialistic view of how our society should be as he does.Its got nothing to do with numbers.Im sorry but I think you are taking too much of what you hear about Obama politics as sound reasoning.

 

[SamH]

I never said he was correct in economic policy. I was just saying that it is a policy and that it does make sense. President Obama doesn’t just come up with economic plans on his own. He isn’t a financial wizard. He does, however, have financial wizards working for him that understand economics far better than I do, and probably better than most, if not all, on CAF. .

It would seem his “financial wizards” have a problem figuring out the US tax code.

 

[valentino]

No it is not just smoke and mirrors. It may not work, but his economic plan is not a scheme or a conspiracy or anything of that sort. His belief is that if he invests in the future, especially in energy, we will become more energy independent. If we become a leader in production and innovation our economy will grow richer, and more taxes from corporations and citizens will bring more money into the government and shrink the deficit. It is the opposite philosophy of Republicans. Republicans believe that by cutting spending we will save money, which makes logical sense, but it may also hurt the federal programs that are (arguably) needed. It is just two different philosophies. In my opinion, neither one is perfect. In fact, I would say both are heavily flawed. They made a compromise, but it wan’t a great one. In reality the Republicans probably should have given a little bit more. I don’t believe a two-party system will serve America to its full potential. Sorry for the rant, and this is all a very simplified version of reality.

God bless!

Well it is a conspiracy in a way.There is more of a capatilistic approach to government and there is a more socialistic way to how a nation should be run.All the people in Obama’s administration think that America should be socialistic.Remember socialist isn’t a dirty word.But its an ideology.But its faulty.where we stand now is that its not working that’s why were on the brink right now.We’ve(American’s)have been trying socialism for many years now and we see where its gotten us.We mustn’t continue in our errors and make things even worse.Obama’s green energy is fine.But it won’t pay off for years.And we can’t wait that long.

 

[karebear92]

Obama’s wizard’s have the same socialistic view of how our society should be as he does.Its got nothing to do with numbers.Im sorry but I think you are taking too much of what you hear about Obama politics as sound reasoning.

I have said many times that it is not a correct policy, but it is not an illogical policy. Economically speaking, should his policy work? Yes, but only in an ideal world. We do not live in ideal world. No one economic policy is more proper or well reasoned than another, they are just reasoned oppositely. Neither side is anywhere close to the ideal situation because one does not exist. That is the problem; Americans can not live the way we live and expect to be in the black. Let me put it this way: his idea that investment in the future does make a considerable amount of sense, but we are currently at a point where his investments may not catch up to our debt with its interest rate. His policy lacks the cut to spending, which is why his policy is heavily flawed.

It would seem his “financial wizards” have a problem figuring out the US tax code.

Yes they do. I never said that they are moral or do their job correctly, but I don’t think that we can discredit their economic opinion because some of them struggle with greed.

Well it is a conspiracy in a way.There is more of a capatilistic approach to government and there is a more socialistic way to how a nation should be run.All the people in Obama’s administration think that America should be socialistic.Remember socialist isn’t a dirty word.But its an ideology.But its faulty.where we stand now is that its not working that’s why were on the brink right now.We’ve(American’s)have been trying socialism for many years now and we see where its gotten us.We mustn’t continue in our errors and make things even worse.Obama’s green energy is fine.But it won’t pay off for years.And we can’t wait that long.

It most certainly does lean quite far to the left. I would agree. Which is the problem with America. I agree that we can not wait that long, but that does not make it a conspiracy. It is a race, kind of, to them. Will our investments pay off before countries will stop borrowing us money? That is the question. Republicans say no. Democrats say yes. I don’t think it is that black an white. America currently runs as if everything is black and white; it is too extreme. Grey can be a beautiful color.