Obama's new leftist goal.....spending freeze

Didn't people laugh at McCain when he had this as one of his main platform points?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/25/AR2010012503549.html?hpid=topnews

So in guns and butter, guns won out.

Can't for once we just cut the military budget.

So in reality the lesson the Dems took from Mass was in fact to move further to the right *face palm* vs trying to keep their core people happy enough to actually go out and vote.

Oddly enough I'd be ok with this if the military budget froze along with everything else, considering it's the largest part of our discretionary budget by far.

So to recap:
Public infrastructure, out
Tanks, in
Obama, tool

 

Mad

You call it a left wing policy in the title then say this shows Obama and the Democrats are moving to the right?

It seems to me the problem is that ideologically the Democrats are still attached to the failed ideas of US neo-liberalism (itself a variation on flawed ‘free market’ thinking), that’s why they’ve been so bad at explaining why a Keynesian approach was needed when neo-liberalism caused the crash (just contrast with FDR).

This is also the reason why they have been so reluctant to attack and reform the neo-liberal systems that brought about the crash (as FDR did).

 

The "leftist" statement was just sarcasm, since the teabaggers always say Obama is a socialist. Obama is trying to appeal to the center and to republicans for some reason, people who hate him and always will while alienating his core supporters. In an interview last week he said he'd rather be a really good one term president then mediocre 2 term president. It's like he's already resigning himself to being Jimmy Carter.

This will be interesting, the house Dems will not like this idea.

 

If he said he wanted to be a mediocre two term pres, he would be attacked for not wanting to be the best pres he could...

The biggest problem I see in pretty much every political system is that it they are based on the whim of the people, and not the informed decision of them.

The systems all cater to people NOT making informed decisions.

 

Obama has been trying to get bipartisanship since day 1 though. He needs to just stop. The Republicans don't want to play along. And he's trying to reach out to people who don't even hate him for policy but call him a communist and say he was born in Kenya. At the same time he's alienating his core supporters who come November are going to go "Wow, what a disappointment, screw this I'm not voting"

 

Well, my theory on what he is doing, is that he is doing everything he can to make sure he gets a second term, just like EVERY politician tries to do...

That is all the first term of any presidency is about unless it becomes obvious they will not make it to the second term.

 

That's the problem, I think he's destroying his chance of trying to get a 2nd term. The people he's trying to appeal to will never vote for him. The people that voted for him are not getting the change they hoped for.

 

I'm not sure =/ Obama has been the marketing departments wet dream.. I'm sure they can rebrand him before election time. His policies do seem to be pretty confusing at the minute.

I'm fairly confused to where I stand on the guy. I really wanted to like him...

It's difficult because when he was running for president he was a lot less held back with promises, and he seem to speak so much sense.. now he's in office, he's being pulled left and right, passing all sorts of policies, and completely paralyzed by the red tape.

 

It's just... his term was one of the *the most* anticipated in so long... and then when he came to power, nothing visible really happened... which we all know is just how it is... you can't change the world over night.. but the pictures the marketing teams painted certainly gave people the impression that he would transform so much within the first year.

I think how he *got* to office is the thing that's going to stop him getting it again.. it's just a huge anti-climax.

 

Capping hte budget is a good start. Or am I wrong here?

 

Hmm In the current financial situation.. you'd think so. But I think it's referring more to spending freezes on all budgets except the Defense Budget.

The Pentagon will be exempted from the freeze, as will the Department of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

 

Unfortunately, with the ruling of the supreme court, the healthcare bill being rewritten by the senate and a growing list of democrats choosing retirement over re-election,I believe that Obama is saying he will only serve one term.When one begins a job with towering hopes of beginning new ideas and changing out dated policies and runs into the brick wall called partisan politics,it sure takes the wind out of your sails.Obama is probably disgusted with the legacy,wars,deficit,and cronies of bush.Anyway I do believe that he has pretty much gave up.

 

It'd be great except there is no crap, it's just a freeze on anything discretionary that isn't the military(well not quite), which takes up nearly 1/2 the discretionary budget, so in reality we're saving near no money while still being screwed.

 

Winston Churchill again – “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried”

Franklin D. Roosevelt - “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.”

Thomas Jefferson – “The price of freedom is eternal vigilance”

*

A democracy might not be a good democracy but it’s better than the alternatives, but for freedom and democracy to work (and improve) people need to be attentive and informed.

The problem is that people seem bamboozled by charlatans and informed by Fox News.

*

 

In Keynesian economics money is borrowed in slumps to stimulate the economy to lessen the impact on the majority of people.

But because we have had deeply flawed neo-liberal policies in place we had a crash and the money that was borrowed was spent propping up a financial sector that was in fear of dragging the world into depression. It did stop a depression happening and is a good thing but it doesn’t mean a slump is not going to happen.

Money was spent saving a minority from there mistakes and setting them up to get back on their feet - but the rightwing is now saying that any expenditure on protecting the majority from that minorities mistakes and helping them to get back on their feet should be stopped.

Government spending shouldn’t be capped it should be expanding.

 

Government can't afford to spend more. Governments that actually have balanced budgets in boom times can afford to borrow. That's not going to happen with us any time soon. Jesus we spend over $165 billion a year just paying the interest on the debt.

 

Now that’s the rub

See if we don’t get the stimulus packages aimed at helping ordinary people and go back (as many on the right want) to neo-liberal economic policy what the US ends up with is completely untenable – the few getting the profits in the good times and getting bailed out by everyone when the crash comes.

A twisted form of bastard bailout Keynes in the bad times and twisted bastard form of ‘free market’ in the good, and in such a system the only winners are the bastards.

You might be able to get a balanced budget under neo-liberalism (but it’s a lot harder) but neo-liberalism will always sets a system up for a fall and then has no mechanism for dealing with that fall.

Keynesian policies can deal with the highs and lows of a financial cycle and are much better at warding off crashes (and if they happen has ways of dealing with them).

*