Wednesday, October 12, 2011

Complicating factors

One thing or maybe a group of things that I think are making our country have a serious problem right now with governing is who are we and who do we want to be? To say we are divided, is to put it  mildly. For a long time people said to have government divided was good as it kept it from doing anything and when it did anything it was bad. Wow what a great idea-- have a huge government where all you expect from them is to do nothing for what you pay them. Wonder how long a corporation would last with that viewpoint.

The thing is half of us want to go one way and the other half the other. 

You have the plan from the right that the rich are not only paying a fair rate, they should pay less and there should be no penalty if they want to send their manufacturing overseas. It is good to help the rich get richer. They see the evil here to be in the poor who, as one presidential candidate, Herman Cain said, are only poor because of their own fault. Cain is so in tune with being an average person he went further to say, as a multimillionaire, he would have died if he'd gotten cancer under Obama's health care plan. I guess he has forgotten that if he'd been among the working poor today, that's when he'd have died. Or maybe he just doesn't know. That's pretty much all the right wing candidates-- blame the poor for their state, think we had no health care problem when 50,000,000 people can't afford insurance, and if someone gets sick or has an accident, let them die.

The other half want the tax codes figured out to get the rich to pay a bigger percentage on the top part of their income. They want to balance the budget by getting in more revenue and not hurting those already hurting financially. They also want gay marriage because it's fair and they know it doesn't hurt their marriage to let two women or two men live together with full rights and status to create their own families. They don't maybe personally like abortion but they want it available and when someone does have a baby when they cannot afford it, they want government programs there to help them.

And on it goes for the divide. Many blamed Obama for not doing more his first two years in office and when he had a majority of Democrats in Congress. The thing was that was never a majority of people who thought like I just mentioned above. They were democrat in name only and they voted with Republicans.

Some say Clinton worked with a Republican controlled Congress. Too true and what did he work with them to do-- ship more manufacturing overseas and gut financial regulations like Glass Seagall. Basically they got him to do what they wanted and it made him look successful. He did nothing about gay rights and in fact began DADT which has now been ended under Obama.

To say I am not thrilled with Obama is true. He has done things or let them happen like the big pipeline through the Ogallala Aquifer which will take oil from Canada to Texas to refine it. Research it if you haven't already heard of it. What it could do to environmental damage is scary or should be and yet who did the research on its safety-- those who have as clients the builders. I am impressed-- not and there is a lot like that.

The thing is until we as Americans figure out who we are, until we define ourselves, we will pay a lot for a government that only knows how to support wars and give itself more power and money.


Ingineer66 said...

What I find funny is that liberals think a national sales tax proposed by Nancy Pelosi a great idea, but a national sales tax proposed by a Republican a horrible plan that is unfair to poor people.

Rain said...

I always wonder h7%ow many liberals you know. It sounds like zero to me. I do not favor any sales tax and live in one of the states that has none and votes it down everytime it's suggested as a regressive tax. Cain though is clueless on his tax. he got it purely for show and it has worked. He knows how to sell and that appeals to evidently 27% of Republicans if the polls are accurate. Incidentally even states with sales taxes often exempt food and medical supplies for the very reason that it unfairly targets the poor.

Read the link I put into the last blog about the reverse robin hood plan. Thinking about what this plan would really mean would convince a lot of Republicans to let it go also. As one economist said it would have everybody paying 18% no matter what their income might be and today a lot of people are not paying much if any. On top of that the guaranteed 9% on corporations would likewise guarantee nothing they did was rewarded for tax breaks which means there is no incentives for any of it plus they pass that on which goes to guess who?

Rain said...

Another thing that bothers me is all the scare talk out there that 50% of Americans get a check from the government which I am assuming means state or federal. Scary to some until they realize the police, firemen, military, elderly, poor, those who build our highways, maintain our food safety, etc etc. are all figured into that. Anytime you talk cutting military the right acts as though we are trying to turn the country over to Iran or the latest boogeyman to keep military costs as high as possible. People hate government until they get told what they'd have to do without if they cut it.

Ingineer66 said...

Obama started a 4th war today and has not ruled out action against Iran, but he is gutting the Military. For a guy that campaigned on ending wars, he has started more than George W. Bush did.

Rain said...

100 advisors does not yet equal a war. A lot of people found fault with ignoring what happened in Rwanda. You agreed with letting masscares happen if we can do something about it? As for his gutting the military, give me a break. That is mostly those who wanted to fight two wars without taxes and now whine over the deficit. The military budget is still up over what it was. Honestly you need to quit listening to right wing as they do nothing but distort and lie.

Ingineer66 said...

I didn't say I was against sending help to people that are being slaughtered. I thought you were against us being the world's policemen? It would be a war and the top story if a Republican President did it. And Vietnam started with advisers being sent in 1955.

Norma said...

This is very well written, and I so appreciate articulate bloggers, even those with whom I disagree. I'll just go to your first point, WE. There is no WE. The USA is many, many ethnic, religious and political groups sliced and diced by gov't and academic studies into quintiles and income and interest groups. I am a Lutheran, and you can't put 5 Lutherans in a room and find any political party or theological concepts on which WE 5 agree. I am a registered Republican, but only since 2000, and sometimes I have to hold my nose and cover my ears, but I began to realize in the 1990s, that enough was never enough. We see that today in the various "Occupy" groups. No matter how much education and stuff the protesters have, they want what someone else has.

And for many Republican politicians, that is true too. Politically, I'd estimate we have at least 6 groups, and they cooperate and morph depending on the issue. Water rights (the Great Lakes) for instance can find a lot of agreement in the midwest among different political groups--we even pull in the Canadians.

There is no division to grieve about because there was no consensus to begin with.

Thanks for stopping by my blog. I have 12 blogs (only about 6 kept current) and I'm always delighted to find another true blogger.

Norma said...

"100 advisors does not yet equal a war." In 1961 Kennedy send 100 troops, aka advisors, into Vietnam.

Rain said...

From what I have read, Kennedy would have pulled out of Vietnam. We paid a high price that he did not have time to do that. Sending advisers still doesn't have to equal a Vietnam or Iraq, but we all face the problem ethically of what to do as a world community about the horrors that happen so often in African, Rwanda being one example but only one.

We have troops all around the world and a lot of Americans would like to pull them all back home. It won't happen probably given that the concern Eisenhower had for the military industrial connection gaining power has come to pass. Too many Americans would crucify any president who dared to say we should come home from Iraq, Afghanistan and everywhere else because we can no longer afford to occupy overseas.

And I am also glad to find a new blogger to try out. It is difficult for right and left wingers to talk about issues; but ingineer and I manage to do it with only rarely getting mad at each other ;) Often though it becomes so maddening to read or hear a view that we consider ridiculous that we have to give up reading that 'other' perspective. I wish there were more real discussions on issues.

Leaving Missoula we caught a talk program that I think was probably right wing oriented but they were having a discussion with two men who had experience in the field which was being covered-- ie what will be the economic impact on the US of the European financial problems? It was quite well done with some call-in and then the 'experts' gave what they knew about the question raised. Excellent feeling and real information from callers and the ones who'd written books-- with the moderator helping it all along. That's not easy to come by with our polarized society. I think it is to be mourned as there is a chance when people really discuss something that they will also learn something. That doesn't happen with the kind of fervid rhetoric both from the far right and far left.

People like Rush Limbaugh (who I also listened to for a bit on this drive) don't help as they distort the facts to suit their preconceived agenda. Limbaugh has no desire to learn anything except from his own comfort zone and that includes any of his political topics-- although I used to listen to him very regularly when I think he was less partisan and covered more of a variety of topics. I don't like the extreme left people either though as snark is snark to me from wherever it comes.

I also have a couple of blogs. One all art, one that is kept to ideas and tries to stay off partisan period (doesn't always succeed though) and now one that is about writing the romance as a prep for when I ePub my own romance manuscripts. I actually enjoy writing Rainy Day Thought more than this one, but I feel this is an important time for people to think where their viewpoints are taking them. I am not super fond though of what this blog sometimes draws to it with people who cannot discuss it without nastiness. We don't have to agree to have a discussion. It is not easy though as many of us have very passionate feelings about these things and likely will never see it the same way. I get mad too but with a different reason.

Ingineer66 said...

I have read that about Kennedy as well. It definately would be interesting to see how the world would be different if Kennedy would have served 2 terms. Some people say he would not have been remembered as that great of a President. But we also would not likely have made it to the moon by the end of the decade without his memory to spur us on.

I have also read that if Lenin would have lived longer he likely would have realized communism was a failure and would have taken the USSR in a different direction.