Obama's Policies - Discussion

[Monkeh]

First off, just wanted to address something: I know there's an election thread, but I wanted this to be a somewhat more condensed and focused thread. I'd like to hear from people on both sides of the spectrum, RESPECTIVELY. I do feel that it should be primarily Americans responding, but anyone who feels they have something relevant to share is more than welcome to share their thoughts.

Basically, when I look at Obama, I see an socialist ideals, strange ideas, and the idea of having him in office is making me uneasy. I'll break my thoughts down.

First off, Obama's tax plan: Those who make more than $250,000 a year will see a sizable increase in taxes, while allegedly 95% of the population will see no change. The problems with this statement are these:
1. Roughly one in fifty US households are projected to take in $250,000 or more when Obama takes office. That's 2%, not 5%.
2. Only ~68% of US citizens even pay an income tax; so how does 95% of the country see a tax CUT?
3. This policy applies only to couples filing jointly; singles are limited to a cap of $125,000 if they want to see a tax cut.
4. American households that are projected to make more than $250,000 will earn approximately 20 percent of nationwide income, but pay approximately 45% of nationwide income taxes. (Possibly even more, since Obama rarely specifies how much he'd like to raise these taxes) That is an extremely high statistic for such a small amount of families, especially if it's just two hardworking spouses making barely over the cap.

Obama has been taped and recorded as telling a small business owner "I think it's better when we spread the wealth around," and "I'm not trying to penalize you, just make it so everyone behind you can have success too." The very ideals laid down by Karl Marx were redistribution of wealth and the government spreading people's money amongst each other so that the somewhat wealthy continue to pour their money to the poor until everyone is at the same level; the poor slightly better, while money is sucked away from anyone who works hard and earns a profitable living. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Obama is going to turn us into the USSR, but don't these ideas of his, almost word for word copied from the teachings of Karl Marx, the founder of modern communism, worry anyone else? Everyone turns a blind eye to them and looks at me like I have three heads when I make this comparison.

Days before the election, in response to allegations of communistic ideals, Obama said: " . . . You know, the next thing I know, they're going to, you know, find evidence of my communistic tendencies because I shared my toys when I was in kindergarten, because I split my peanut butter and jelly sandwich with my friend in sixth grade." This is ridiculous; in response to fair and legitimate allegations, Obama uses cynicism to downplay the truth and use humor to sway people who fail to think too deeply on the issues.

On Health Care, taken directly from Obama's website:

*Barack Obama will make health insurance affordable and accessible to all:

The Obama-Biden plan provides affordable, accessible health care for all Americans, builds on the existing health care system, and uses existing providers, doctors and plans to implement the plan.
*Obama will lower health care costs:

The Obama plan will lower health care costs by $2,500 for a typical family by investing in health information technology, prevention and care coordination.
*Promote public health:

Obama and Biden will require coverage of preventive services, including cancer screenings, and will increase state and local preparedness for terrorist attacks and natural disasters.

He doesn't address health care at all! Nothing here actually says how he plans to to accomplish anything. The only way he'll ever get health care costs as low as he wants is to try to force the country into a universal health care system. In Universal Health Care systems, people like my mother who are sick with progressive disorders and require advanced, specialized health care in special clinics and must live with dozens of prescriptions and doctors do not receive adequate care. People are not covered for dentistry, optic health, and similar industries. Health care should not be government regulated, there are simply too many flaws in the system for it to be worthwhile.

I'll also talk about Gun Control before leaving the discussion open. Obama is extremely anti-gun, although he will say otherwise. He has stated that he "Supports the second amendment," but also "that the state or local government can constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it."

This is completely contradictory; the second amendment clearly states that American citizens have the right to keep AND bear firearms, and in the Heller vs. District of Columbia supreme court case earlier this year, the court ruled that not only were handgun bans unconstitutional, but that self defense was an important element of the second amendment. Despite this amendment, Obama is in favor of restricting the legal purchase and use of firearms for self defense by law abiding citizens, under the excuse that these guns lead to crime on the streets, which is a downright lie. An overwhelming majority of handgun crimes on on the streets are performed by illegally purchased handguns, and legal handguns used in self defense HUGELY outnumber the number of crimes committed with legal guns.

I'm not just trying to bash Obama, I just want an informed discussion/debate on his policies. Let's try to keep it respectful and relevant, shall we? Looking forward to hearing any rebuttals, agreements, etc.

[NightWolf]

Your views on Obama are pretty much the same way I see things. For the record, I did not support McCain in the election either.

[Mr. Happy]

Obama's plans aren't perfect and if I was pres-elect I would have many differences, but on the whole they are the best plan that has been presented, and a huge step in the right direction. It might sound in what I'm going to say that I'm simply defending it, but I aim more to explain it, and, since there is no better plan out there, I will defend it.

I don't think you have any idea what socialism is, since his plan is the farthest thing from it. In fact it's not any different from any other tax plan we've had in the past hundred years except that the percentages are chaning...again. There are times when the top payed 98% tax rates, adn there's been times where they paid very little. It's not a perfect plan either, but there's nothing seriously wrong with it. The vast majority of people, and even greater majority in congress support a progressive tax bracket. On the one hand you've got people saying cut cut cut cut cut, and on the other youv'e got people saying raise raise raise raise raise. Neither is good, it should be set at the correct level, reorganized, streamlined, and then left alone. After 80 years of cutting, a little raise isn't a problem.

He doesn't need to respond to the communist allegations because they are ludicrous allegations coming from people who don't know what communism is.

On healthcare, I haven't but have you actually read the plan? It can't be summarized in bullet points, and he has talked about it a great deal adn written it down and it is accessible and available if you look for it. You not knowing what it is isn't the same as saying that it doesn't exist.

On the second ammendment, I see no contradiction here. Just like the first ammendment, it can be reasonably regulated and limited without infringing upon it. You can't shout fire in a crowded theater (it's illegal), and you can't buy rocket launchers and fully armed attack helicoptors.

The second ammedment says the right to keep and bear arms. Not guns, arms. So on the one extreme, because regulation of that right is allowed and constitutional, the government could ban everything but pocket knives. On the other extreme they could allow private citizens to purchase tanks, naval destroyers, tomahawk, cruise missels, etc.

What should be done is somewhere in between. No letting convicted violent felons purchase firearms is probably a good idea, having background checks (which if you've ever bought a gun know takes what five minutes and isn't an inconvenience) is a good idea, letting someone walk into a store and buy 500 AR-15's, 100,000 rounds of ammo, 1000 clips, 2000 stripper clips, 500 bullet proof vests, a ton of black powder, 2000 decomissioned grenades, a mile of primacord, and 2000 blasting caps probably isn't a good idea.

[MayheM]

Well I agree with Monkeh 100% especially on the economic areas of Obamas plans. This country is based on the belief if you work hard you get ahead in life. His ideas on economics make it so that I work hard so you get ahead. If his ideas sway too far we will see more and more people saying "why give 100% when i can make the same if I work 50%." I do not believe in entitlements, I believe in oportunism. Everyone should ahve the oportunity to make money and get ahead if they work hard. But to "spread the wealth", no not so much. Work hard get paid, dont and struggle. The problem is our sociaty puts blame on everyone but the individual. If a kid fucks off in school, should he be given 25% of an A students grade, an A student who ballanced school and a social life and learned to priorities. If we do that we set both students up for failure. The A student will only resent the slacktard and feel cheated becaseu they worked hard for those grades, while the other student will move on in life thinking it is Ok to fuck off in all aspect of life.

Only time will tell whether Obama was in fact a good choice. I for one am very much scared of what is to come. But I have promised myself to keep as open a mind as I can, after all there is nothing I can do for the next 4 years....

[stoopdapoop]

"why give 100% when i can make the same if I work 50%."

I didn't know that's how it worked...

But happy's right. This isn't anything new, the progressive tax system has been here forever, and on the issues you need to see this stuff with moderation, his example with the shouting fire in a theater is perfect.

I believe it was his acceptance speech that he gave after winning the primary that he said something along the lines of "don't tell me we can't keep guns out of the hands of criminals on the street and not uphold the right to bear arms at the same time" or something.

Happy, can we expect to see your name on the ballot in 2012? I'll vote for you

[Mr-Jigsaw]

No letting convicted violent felons purchase firearms is probably a good idea, having background checks (which if you've ever bought a gun know takes what five minutes and isn't an inconvenience) is a good idea,

Man, here in California, you have to wait twelve days until you even can pick it up.

[Monkeh]

I know perfectly well what socialism is. I'm not saying he's going to seize control of Washington and establish a communist regime or anything. I was just trying to point out that his ideas of distributing wealth, government control of money and health care are rather similar to some socialist ideas, and that it makes me somewhat uneasy, knowing the power of the presidency.

On gun control: Just because I believe citizens should be able to keep a firearm for protection doesn't mean they should be able to just waltz out and buy rocket launchers or helicopters. Obviously not, there are ordinances in place against that. What I'm talking about are cities such as New York City, Chicago, The District of Columbia in which there is an all out ban on handgun ownership, and where perfectly responsible, mentally healthy, non-felons cannot purchase a handgun to defend themselves. Meanwhile criminals can simply buy a gun and a few bullets for $100 from a guy selling out of his pickup in a back alley at night. Obama is for bans such as these, and has the ability to simply sign everyone's right away. My father carries a gun for protection at all times, especially when he commutes to and from Boston and my uncle's pistol has saved him twice. Gun bans don't help the country or reduce crime, they strip good citizens of their ability to defend themselves against criminals.

Subsidized governmental health care does not solve the problems of insurance. Sure, people without it could get some shitty form of subsidized health care, but I fail to see how cheap governmental health care (Let's face it; yes, we could implement it, but it wouldn't be any better than Canada's, and people such as my mother who are extremely reliant on health care would not benefit if we did not already have decent health insurance) solves problems in the long term.

I am looking at this from a moderate standpoint. I consider myself a Libertarian in most aspects and I don't like showing allegiance to the GOP or Democratic Party, and I would like nothing better to have this country succeed and to be completely wrong about Barack. I'm just looking for some well formed opinions and discussion, as it's virtually impossible to find intelligent Obama supporters in my school - not to say anyone who supports him is dumb, I'm just saying that a majority of kids in my grade simply cheer "Change, yeah! Black president HOO-RAH!" without really understanding what or who they're voting into offices.

[NightWolf]

The progressive income tax is socialism and is collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods to include one's wealth. If there is going to be an income tax, it should be handled by the individual states and equal, better yet, income should not be taxed...only consumption should be taxed...not sales...built into the good's development.

When one commits to the act of bettering one's life with the sweat of their brow and the toil of their labor, one is actually expending a portion of their physical life for the betterment of themselves or on behalf of their family. When one is FORCED by the federal government to pay taxes without choice, they are effectively being coerced by the threat of force to give a portion of their life to another person or a cause that the individual may not feel compelled to help. If however the individual were to pay taxes to the State and which would be apportioned to the federal government, that individual has better control of the tax policies levied by the State and can make changes to those policies easier. If the tax policies of that state become burdensome or non-agreeable, the individual has the choice to relocate. States should be treated as little capitalist laboratories; what works in one state may not necessarily work in another or be welcomed.

The second ammedment says the right to keep and bear arms. Not guns, arms. So on the one extreme, because regulation of that right is allowed and constitutional, the government could ban everything but pocket knives. On the other extreme they could allow private citizens to purchase tanks, naval destroyers, tomahawk, cruise missels, etc.

Anyone who thinks guns should be regulated is crazy to think that if they're not, that mass amount of people will go buy cruise missiles and destroyers. Anyhow, as long as one does not impede on my right to life, property, or my freedom from aggression/coercion, why would I care if they own a bazooka? The argument that convicted violent felons shouldn't be able to have guns holds no water because once the felon has served their time they are free, they have served their sentence. If the violent felon has killed someone then their sentence will be life in prison or death. If I want to buy 500 AR-15's why not, it doesn't necessarily mean that I'm going to commit a crime. The right to bear arms was delineated in the Bill of Rights for one reason only...to stop tyranny. With that being said, should the government (government=force) have the monopoly on weapons? Luckily for our patriots, they were able to overcome the rule of the British crown by stealing their heavy arms (and destroying) in raids.


I consider myself a libertarian as well, I like maximum economic freedom and personal freedom with strict adherence to the constitution.

[Monkeh]

You make a strong point regarding the tax policies, and I'm glad to find someone who agrees with me.

I'm sorry though, I think once you're convicted of a felony, you shouldn't be allowed to own a gun simply because you've proven through your actions that you ARE a threat to society, as opposed to someone who through years and years of responsible citizenship proves that they are NOT.

PS: Yeah, another Libertarian! I felt so alone.

[medestruit]

The major flaw in the "tax cut" idea...is government spending never goes down to make up the difference. If government spending was cut, tax cuts would work. But as it is, government spending is just re-distributed. Obama wants to take the spending out of the military and place it into public health care. That is not cutting spending at all.

The way(or the best way I can interpret Obama's plans, since all I hear is "we're going to change" without hearing any real way of going about that change) I understand it, Obama is basically doing 1 of 2 things:

1. Making as much of the population working class as possible. This leaves the upper .2% of the wealthy keeping their money(these are the ones who also invest internationally, so hold a great portion of their earnings overseas and are not eligible for taxation on certain funds) but still being taxed heavily, and the other 4.8% of the wealthy to receive major taxation. This basically, as the story you posted(and I had heard this as well before during the campaign) states, will cut out the independent business owners. They will now become the "educated working man" but not in the same administrative positions as they are owning their own business. In-turn for cutting out a lot of jobs, it also increases the education level needed to gain a lower income job. I know pursuing an education is what every president over the last 20 years has really tried pushing the lower income percentages of the U.S. to do(the "no child left behind" agenda and other such education proposals that have gone through since the Reagan era) but making them need to be more educated to gain a simple job is just going to make it harder on the. I am a firm believer that "no child left behind" is a major educational killer for the more intelligent people going through grade school(I myself took every advanced class I could and graduated with a dual-seal diploma with quite a few distinctions) but felt like I got them...too easily. I never felt pushed in grade school, and I think that set me back a bit going into my mechanical engineering degree at Mercer University. I went to a high school that had been among the top 20 in the state of Georgia in educational standards, so I don't think it was just my school, either. This whole ideal the way it is drawn out will have an adverse effect on the economy and the people.

2. The other effect I see coming from the current proposal he has on the taxes issue, is pushing more and more businesses overseas. Those Best Buys, CVS, Walgreens, etc; the middle of the road corporate businesses who aren't like the oil companies or the financial industry- this could literally push them to look internationally to move their headquarters to avoid the major taxation. They would be taxed less to export all their goods via online sales or having certain flagship distributions centers, than to keep them inside the states under this particular plan. Once again, cutting a lot of jobs.


Those 2 ideals are what weigh heavily on me as far as his tax proposals go. I just, really fear that. I voted McCain, but I keep a really open mind. I don't mind that Obama got voted, I just hope people did it because of his issues more than because of "making history" and the such.

[DocRock]

[NightWolf]

Yes, for the tax cuts like that to work you will definitely need to cut spending by a whole lot. You cant really talk about cutting spending much without changing foreign policy though.

[MayheM]

It could be I just got in from a night of drinking btu I have two things two say about DocRocks vidoe post...

1.Holy SHIT it's Doc Rock... HUGE fan of your maps back from the days of KitKat on GlobalAssault.com

2. Oh my god that is every person I work with. Only now they are protesting Prop. 8 being past.

Man I really laughed so freaking hard watching that.... Good Stuff...

[dissonance]

ololololo massive social programs with no way to pay for them

in b4 socalist welfare state

[Athlete{UK}]

"almost word for word copied from the teachings of Karl Marx, the founder of modern communism, worry anyone else? Everyone turns a blind eye to them and looks at me like I have three heads when I make this comparison.

Or socialism. Which is sometimes seen as a transitional to communism but is fair different.

I honestly believe it's not a bad thing. Quite frankly the great capitalist dream has left the worlds economy in complete meltdown so i don't understand this huge phobia towards ideas from any other kind of economical system since when you break something like this there is no point in just fixing what you have. You have to make drastic changes.

It's immensly sensationlist of you to draw the conversation towards "Obama will make us communist." Besides it was the great hope for capitalism the Republicans who nationalised your banks.