I'd like to see the first presidential address start out with:
"Well, I guess you elected me thinking I was yet another big government fascist, here to collect everyone's money and nationalize industries. Unfortunately for the lazy, the jealous, and bailout whores, I am a strict Constitutionalist and it's time to start letting people keep what they earn and give them their freedoms back."
Yeah, I know - but you asked what I HOPED for, not what I expected.
I expect BIGGER government, because the answer to failed big government is always, necessarily, more big government. I think Hayek predicted this in Road to Serfdom.
We'll watch government collect lots of money from the productive, and divert it to politically motivated government projects, and we'll call it "progress"
We'll repeat the mistakes that create the Great Depression. We'll continue massively inflating the money supply, creating government programs to compete with private industry by (laugh) "creating" jobs.
We'll rip some freedoms away from some people that don't need them, like those pesky gun owners.
When it fails, we'll grand speeches about how it failed because we simply didn't spend ENOUGH of taxpayer's trillions, we didn't have ENOUGH bureaucrats, and we need MORE big government programs - because that's why government always fails, there's just not enough of it.
Oh, and we'll buy it, too - hook, line, and sinker - and we'll vote for "more of the same", just like we did this time. Hope for change my ass, same establishment is running the show, folks - nothing new to see here.
Welcome to the world of government jobs creation programs. They don't work, jobs are created for political reasons rather than economic ones, and we all end up getting screwed.
Lots of people mistakenly believe programs like this will only take idle workers, and therefore is only beneficial. However, that's a completely unrealistic concept. Large projects like this, or these "green" jobs will draw employed workers from other fields, drain resources from private industry, consume capital that could be used by private industry...
In the New Deal, this didn't help the unemployment rate, it took drafting 11.5 million men to do that. However, it was very effective in cementing the New Deal coalition that kept one political party in office for a few decades.
This will be about as effective as the New Deal was (beyond the rhetoric) - all we'll need is this and a world war to pull us out of this depression too!
Eric Holder was Janet Reno's right hand man that went on a rampage against all forms of private firearms ownership. If anti-individual rights zealots like that are "moderate democrats", I'd hate to see the true lefties.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have any faith in the righties either, we're pretty much screwed either way, because both halves are hopping on the fascism train.
Why do people keep acting like there's some substantial difference between Bush and Obama?
Hell, he's not even in office yet and we're already staying in Iraq. W00t!
Next you'll tell me there's some real difference between the Republican and Democratic parties... that one wants to spend hundreds of billions on corporate welfare, and the other wants to spend hundreds of billions on individual welfare....
It's hard to blame Microsoft for moving money offshore to avoid taxes, we're the idiots that tax the hell out of our populace and our companies and think no bad could ever come from it. Perhaps if we were a bit more supportive of success rather than spending $700B - $1,700B rewarding failure...
Yeah, Europe's in such great shape that plenty of them still come here for good and timely medical care.
I guess I'm not quite sure how you're blaming the private sector entirely for "healthcare" and "credit crisis". I'll put the blame squarely on government intervention for both. Government for pushing HMOs, mandating insurance that operates as collectivism rather than insurance, allowing lawyers to run roughshod over the medical industry, and empowering bureacrats over doctors. As for the credit crisis, I don't look much farther than the Federal Reserve manipulating the money supply to encourage speculative and risky investments.
The free market works great, we just wouldn't know, we don't have one. We're regulated to death, but people are so blind, they call for MORE regulation by the very idiots that caused these problems.
You'll never roll back Sarbanes-Oxley. The accounting firms' own too much of Congress. It's all about funneling billions into the hands of accounting firms, so they can keep paying off Senators and Representatives. This is very little different than any other government intrusion regulating private enterprise - completely ineffective in it's stated goals, but funnels lots of cash into those that "contribute" to elections.
Thank God we can go back to the 90s when my money was taken from me and given to the administration's cronies 'for the children' - I've gotten so tired of the 00s and 'fight the terrorists'. Maybe we should go retro back to the 80s and 'the war on drugs'...
Ignoring the rather revolting implications of your post (that people should die so their money can be plundered by society) - you have a flaw in your logic. Well, one aside from the implication that the Evil Rich (TM) hide their money in mattresses instead of investing it or putting it in banks where it's used for your mortgage loan... or into their businesses where it's used to hire you (or do you not have a job?)
If these medical processes are expensive, those Evil Rich (TM) will be spending that money and pouring it into the medical profession, to people who will in turn, spend and invest that money. Well, at least until Obama nationalizes that, then it will be absorbed by the government and spent on future wars.
Also, I'd hope you'd have a bit more imagination than to think we couldn't use our lengthened and enhanced lifespans to achieve new scientific goals - such as colonize other planets, giving us plenty of room to breath.
Sorry, but I've had enough socialism, enough encroachment on my rights, and enough taxes.
I'm voting for a Libertarian, because FREEDOM made this country great, not a huge oppressive government.
Obama and McCain differ only slightly, neither one is any different than those that came before. They will continue to whore themselves to the highest bidder at our expensive, and run this country into the ground.
It's getting more and more expensive and convoluted to abide by if you have to do more than the self-assessment. All the while, quite a few companies skirt by dangerously by faking it or lying.
It seems like we might all be a little safer if they toned the requirements down a bit in a few areas, but beefed up the auditing requirements on the fundamentals.
Although I'm sure you and I agree on how big of a jackass GWB is, you can hardly say he *created* the national debt. I think that honor is shared among a long line of democrats and republicans.
What change? What changes is he going to make? He's always nice and vague. Change.
Hope for change.
We're going to change things.
What if I don't like the change?
I certainly don't think I need to pay a bunch more taxes. I also don't believe he's really going to pull us out of Iraq any quicker than anyone else.
If you're hot on 3rd parties, vote for one - stop throwing your vote away re-electing the establishment. Even if they do throw that "change" word around a lot.
Bigger government, more regulation, and higher taxes doesn't sound like change. Sounds like more of the same!
Slashdot Mirror
But I think we recognized we're not entitled to other people's stuff; if we want a new toy, we have to EARN it through hard work.
I'd have to say you're wrong, your generation has not learned that. My evidence is their voting record in the 2008 Presidential election. :)
First, thank your neighbor, who paid for your coupon. Good looting.
We the people have discovered we can just vote ourselves money - usually the best way to end a republic.
I suspect anyone posting what you said probably isn't all too familiar with said Constitution.
Those that don't understand how the Constitution was written to preserve freedom are doomed to lose it.
It's just unfortunate you're losing it for the rest of us too.
Also a poor choice for an analogy with the EU on your part, the Federal government WAS granted the authority to regulate trade for a reason.
I'd like to see the first presidential address start out with:
"Well, I guess you elected me thinking I was yet another big government fascist, here to collect everyone's money and nationalize industries. Unfortunately for the lazy, the jealous, and bailout whores, I am a strict Constitutionalist and it's time to start letting people keep what they earn and give them their freedoms back."
Yeah, I know - but you asked what I HOPED for, not what I expected.
I expect BIGGER government, because the answer to failed big government is always, necessarily, more big government. I think Hayek predicted this in Road to Serfdom.
We'll watch government collect lots of money from the productive, and divert it to politically motivated government projects, and we'll call it "progress"
We'll repeat the mistakes that create the Great Depression. We'll continue massively inflating the money supply, creating government programs to compete with private industry by (laugh) "creating" jobs.
We'll rip some freedoms away from some people that don't need them, like those pesky gun owners.
When it fails, we'll grand speeches about how it failed because we simply didn't spend ENOUGH of taxpayer's trillions, we didn't have ENOUGH bureaucrats, and we need MORE big government programs - because that's why government always fails, there's just not enough of it.
Oh, and we'll buy it, too - hook, line, and sinker - and we'll vote for "more of the same", just like we did this time. Hope for change my ass, same establishment is running the show, folks - nothing new to see here.
Welcome to the world of government jobs creation programs. They don't work, jobs are created for political reasons rather than economic ones, and we all end up getting screwed.
Lots of people mistakenly believe programs like this will only take idle workers, and therefore is only beneficial. However, that's a completely unrealistic concept. Large projects like this, or these "green" jobs will draw employed workers from other fields, drain resources from private industry, consume capital that could be used by private industry ...
In the New Deal, this didn't help the unemployment rate, it took drafting 11.5 million men to do that. However, it was very effective in cementing the New Deal coalition that kept one political party in office for a few decades.
This will be about as effective as the New Deal was (beyond the rhetoric) - all we'll need is this and a world war to pull us out of this depression too!
Eric Holder was Janet Reno's right hand man that went on a rampage against all forms of private firearms ownership. If anti-individual rights zealots like that are "moderate democrats", I'd hate to see the true lefties.
Don't get me wrong, I don't have any faith in the righties either, we're pretty much screwed either way, because both halves are hopping on the fascism train.
Why do people keep acting like there's some substantial difference between Bush and Obama?
Hell, he's not even in office yet and we're already staying in Iraq. W00t!
Next you'll tell me there's some real difference between the Republican and Democratic parties... that one wants to spend hundreds of billions on corporate welfare, and the other wants to spend hundreds of billions on individual welfare....
ah crap, now I forgot which is which.
Damnit, stop trying to confuse statists with logic or economics. It's just not fair!
Next you'll tell them we can't just infinitely expand the money supply to pay off all our debts ... feh!
http://www.garagetv.be/video-galerij/blancostemrecht/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle_Documentary_Film.aspx
What? He found another job without a government bailout to prop up this industry?!
Absurd!
Who owns the restaurant? Whose property is it?
If I don't like you picking your nose, I should be able to ask you to leave my property - otherwise, how's it even my property?
As for breast feeding, we'll sure all be a lot better off when we get over our absurd victorian values. Who the hell cares?
It's hard to blame Microsoft for moving money offshore to avoid taxes, we're the idiots that tax the hell out of our populace and our companies and think no bad could ever come from it. Perhaps if we were a bit more supportive of success rather than spending $700B - $1,700B rewarding failure ...
Neither one of them are going to do anything to enhance my freedom, or let me keep more of my earnings. Where does that put them, authoritarian?
I recall reading in history books about when "liberals" were people that didn't trust or like government. Who usurped our word?
Yeah, Europe's in such great shape that plenty of them still come here for good and timely medical care.
I guess I'm not quite sure how you're blaming the private sector entirely for "healthcare" and "credit crisis". I'll put the blame squarely on government intervention for both. Government for pushing HMOs, mandating insurance that operates as collectivism rather than insurance, allowing lawyers to run roughshod over the medical industry, and empowering bureacrats over doctors. As for the credit crisis, I don't look much farther than the Federal Reserve manipulating the money supply to encourage speculative and risky investments.
The free market works great, we just wouldn't know, we don't have one. We're regulated to death, but people are so blind, they call for MORE regulation by the very idiots that caused these problems.
Oh, whew, it's about time we can have broadband access run with all the competence and efficiency of a government program!
You'll never roll back Sarbanes-Oxley. The accounting firms' own too much of Congress. It's all about funneling billions into the hands of accounting firms, so they can keep paying off Senators and Representatives. This is very little different than any other government intrusion regulating private enterprise - completely ineffective in it's stated goals, but funnels lots of cash into those that "contribute" to elections.
Thank God we can go back to the 90s when my money was taken from me and given to the administration's cronies 'for the children' - I've gotten so tired of the 00s and 'fight the terrorists'. Maybe we should go retro back to the 80s and 'the war on drugs' ...
Greetings, budding socialist.
Ignoring the rather revolting implications of your post (that people should die so their money can be plundered by society) - you have a flaw in your logic. Well, one aside from the implication that the Evil Rich (TM) hide their money in mattresses instead of investing it or putting it in banks where it's used for your mortgage loan... or into their businesses where it's used to hire you (or do you not have a job?)
If these medical processes are expensive, those Evil Rich (TM) will be spending that money and pouring it into the medical profession, to people who will in turn, spend and invest that money. Well, at least until Obama nationalizes that, then it will be absorbed by the government and spent on future wars.
Also, I'd hope you'd have a bit more imagination than to think we couldn't use our lengthened and enhanced lifespans to achieve new scientific goals - such as colonize other planets, giving us plenty of room to breath.
Finally we can tax ourselves into prosperity!
Who wants to take bets on:
Us not withdrawing from Iraq?
Whether most slashdotters with decent IT careers end up paying more taxes?
Don't take this wrong, McCain sucks too. I just wish people would stop drinking from either coolaid.
Sorry, but I've had enough socialism, enough encroachment on my rights, and enough taxes.
I'm voting for a Libertarian, because FREEDOM made this country great, not a huge oppressive government.
Obama and McCain differ only slightly, neither one is any different than those that came before. They will continue to whore themselves to the highest bidder at our expensive, and run this country into the ground.
PCI really seems like a good idea, gone wrong.
It's getting more and more expensive and convoluted to abide by if you have to do more than the self-assessment. All the while, quite a few companies skirt by dangerously by faking it or lying.
It seems like we might all be a little safer if they toned the requirements down a bit in a few areas, but beefed up the auditing requirements on the fundamentals.
Although I'm sure you and I agree on how big of a jackass GWB is, you can hardly say he *created* the national debt. I think that honor is shared among a long line of democrats and republicans.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/inflation.gif
What change? What changes is he going to make? He's always nice and vague. Change.
Hope for change.
We're going to change things.
What if I don't like the change?
I certainly don't think I need to pay a bunch more taxes. I also don't believe he's really going to pull us out of Iraq any quicker than anyone else.
If you're hot on 3rd parties, vote for one - stop throwing your vote away re-electing the establishment. Even if they do throw that "change" word around a lot.
Bigger government, more regulation, and higher taxes doesn't sound like change. Sounds like more of the same!