AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

But not sad for those who truly believe that most of Obama's "victories" are positively harmful to the country. Not to mention that most have also been tainted by massive government payoffs to his loyal constituents (but not the people as a whole).

The 'victory' in discussion right now is a tax cut for small businesses. The point is that Republicans have been hammering exactly this as a partial solution for the economic mess we find ourselves in. That doesn't matter, now, because they aren't interested in passing anything at all.

SO, the fact that the Prez and Dems are willing to go along with what is essentially a Republican idea, and that idea can't be passed in Congress because the Republicans would rather choke to death than hand Obama a legislative victory, is sad for us all, George.



Partisan carping is boring and a waste of people's time, George. You don't like Democrats, Bureaucracies or Unions. You don't need to remind everyone of this with every post.

Cycloptichorn

ci, I agree with you that in today's atmosphere of people knowing Social Security is always out there, it adds to the liklihood and the reality that many people do not and will not save for their retirement. Many people seem to think that Social Security is the only thing needed to support them. I am not sure if they really believe it or they just seem to live that way, because it takes more discipline than many people have anymore to save for a rainy day. It seems like society has gotten into the mode of instant gratification, if you can get it now, go for it. So given the society as we now see it, perhaps forced retirement insurance is the only form of insurance that some people will end up with, and without it, they would starve to death.

That does not change the fact that Social Security is at its root a Socialistic program that in the long run is probably destined to go broke, because there is another factor always in play out there, that government is also very undisciplined and has a tendency to spend money it does not have or will not have.

In regard to your personal responsibility, you and your spouse, I commend you, ci. Anyone that is responsible enough to do as well as you have for your retirement deserves credit and compliments. I sense that you are like almost every other person in this country, you have lived your life according to conservative principles. Rush often points this out, and I believe it is factual, that in reality most people live conservatively, because they have to as an American living in an atmosphere of liberty and personal responsibility. So then we have a dichotomy going on, how come you don't demand your government also conduct itself conservatively? I don't mean to go off on a tangent with that question, as my larger subject here is to give you compliments and to tell you that my wife and I have similarly lived our lives and planned for our retirement, which should end up being sufficient.

I have worked for a corporation in my earlier career and am vested from that. Then I ran my own business for more than 20 years, and paid into a SEP during all of that time. That is the reason I know what compounding interest and market growth of funds will do over a period of many years. In the meantime, I have been able to purchase very good family health insurance and take care of other necessities.

Interesting experiences with our health insurance, we have found that doctors are extremely likely to grant discounts when they find you are paying cash under a high deductible threshold, and perhaps even more importantly we have found many errors on medical bills, sometimes hundreds of dollars, for example charging for an ambulance ride that did not occur. That is why I am so convinced that the path to more responsible medical care is to shift as much responsibility to the people that are receiving the service, which would eliminate much of the overcharging and bring down costs significantly.

We have been able to buy our cars with cash every few years, mostly used ones with low mileage, our home is also now paid off, and we took one trip to Europe that cost us upward of 10 grand which we paid for at the time. We pay our credit cards off every month, mainly used for gasoline and occasional motel stays on short trips. I credit my parents who lived through the depression and never owned a credit card, for teaching us children how to live responsibly and stay out of debt.

I started with no money at all in grade school, I have paid for all of my college and everything else and have not received any kind of inheritance, so it has been proven to me not only with my own experience but with observing many other people, that responsible and conservative living will succeed in this country. We are not wealthy, certainly not millionaires, but we live comfortably. It is all conservative in principle, and so I see no reason why we should not demand our government also do the same thing. Count me conservative and voting Republican in every election, ci, because although imperfect they offer by far the best hope of governing in a reasonable and fiscally responsible manner.

The really sad part of it is that while its the repubs doing it right now, both parties are guilty of doing it.

Its a game to the people in Washington, and neither side wants to admit that their game is hurting the entire country and that eventually the country will say "enough" and vote all of them out.

Your opinion only. It is conservative principles that built this great country upon a conservative constitution and Bill of Rights, and they are now attempting to preserve this country from those liberal politicians that are attacking it from within with irresponsible liberal policies.

We're not so different when it comes to money, Okie - we use no credit cards (unless it's 100% unavoidable), pay for everything up front, have no bills or debts outstanding. We save 1/3rd of our income every single month into retirement savings.

Re: Social Security, paying into it certainly isn't harming MY ability to save for the future. But it does help the old ladies who live down the street from me pay their bills every month, without forcing them to move back in with their kids. This is the true effect of SS - it fueled, and continues to fuel, a gigantic expansion in home ownership and wealth here in America. It has been a massive boon for all of us, including you.

Cycloptichorn

It's not only the latest bill that the GOP defeated. Universal health care was also on the GOPs wish list:


Not one GOP voted in favor of Obamacare. Your conclusion that the GOP doesn't want to give Obama any victories is spot on!

The Mandate was also a Republican idea from the 90's. Not that this stops them from running away from it now.

Cycloptichorn

okie, You really do miss the primary issue about "socialistic programs." ALL successful industrialized countries have socialistic programs, many with better standard of living than ours - and they are happier - even though our country spends the most on health care. It has to do with attempting to take care of the citizens of their own country; to provide for a good education, and better health to all. These issues should be number one for all countries, and secondary to starting wars half way around the world - especially those that last much longer than WWII that was a "necessary" war.

Cyclops, you have just posted proof that you as a liberal also live conservatively, at least the financial part of your life. This is an interesting point that Rush Limbaugh makes from time to time, that the vast majority of people conduct their lives with mostly conservative principles guiding them. Conservatism is really just common sense principles, are they not, cyclops?

Actually, at this stage of the game, I am willing to accept Social Security as an inevitable program that we need to keep, and I think virtually every Republican would agree with that. I think you would have to tap into pure Libertarian politics to find people advocating it be abolished now, so we know it is here to stay. I do think however that we should not dismiss the ideas that deserve consideration for improving and keeping solvent Social Security, which might include some degree of privatizing. Perhaps only a portion of privatizing should be allowed, and perhaps only on a voluntary basis? I would have to research how those programs are going now, but I seem to recall programs of privatizing in a couple of South American countries were working very well a few years ago.

With that said, I do think we should educate every citizen starting with kids in public schools, by teaching that Social Security was instituted as a "SUPPLEMENTAL" retirement insurance program, and that it was never sold even originally as a complete retirement program for people. I think we should go back to teaching something called "citizenship," whereby children grow up being taught that living in America not only guarantees them the freedoms and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but that along with those freedoms and liberties are also responsibilities to acquire job skills, life skills, and financial skills to support themselves and their families as well as they can. Of course everyone knows that not everyone is as capable as others and that people can fall upon bad luck and hard times, but I believe people could do better than we are currently doing if we emphasized good citizenship throughout their educational experience, and even for adults it should be routinely pointed out by politicians.

I have consistently maintained that the strongest system is one in which elements of both Conservatism and Liberalism are present; one in which Competition and Cooperation are present. Perhaps you should think about this a while before constantly demonizing the other side.

Cycloptichorn

It's also a given that home ownership helps the economy of the country. I shouldn't have to list the many ways in which it does help the economy.

However, I will disagree with the way Obama has tried to subsidize those home owners who bought homes without the necessary basic income level to afford them. His program was sloppy, and most who took advantage of his program ended up going bankrupt. Sloppy spending is the curse of Obama, and I will continue to challenge the way he spends money to increase our national debt.

What Obama fails to understand is that the primary goal for his administration should be job creation. In order to do that, he must spend money on infrastructure that will improve our roads, bridges, communication, and transportation. If he does that, the result will be job creation, more tax income, and the multiplier effect of job creation.

Our government spent two times our GDP to fund the war; that resulted in the economic boom after the war, because people had money to spend on homes and all that goes with it. The other benefit we received from the government was the GI Bill that allowed our ex-soldiers to attend college. With the background of a good education, and the money in consumers pockets to purchase goods and services, our economy grew to the strongest in the world.

That's a record we need to repeat now.

I have seen this posted here before, that other countries have better standards of living, but frankly I don't believe it. I don't know which countries are supposed to be better, but I have relatives in Denmark and the U.K., and have visited both, and both are living with lower standards of living than we are here. If anyone claims they are higher standards of living, they are using a measuring stick much different than common sense would tell us. The relatives in the UK have been here and are amazed at the American way of life and how opulently we live here.

ci, what Obama never understood up until now, and I am not sure if he is beginning to figure it out, but it is the American people and their businesses that hold the key to the economy, not the government and government spending. The government needs to create the right atmosphere of taxation and regulation to encourage the American people to take risks, work, and to thrive, which will bring a healthy economy. Recent suggested proposals by Obama, sort of a political deathbed set of proposals in an effort for him to live politically, might indicate Obama is beginning to get it, ci.

No, okie, you still don't "get it." You also don't understand our history, and what happened during and after WWII.

What do you think got us out of the Great Depression? Think a little, if you can.

The problem is that your theory is bullshit in reality, Okie. Business have thrived and made tons of money and jobs and profits under HIGHER levels of taxation than exist today. There is no way that you can possibly posit that cutting taxes and regulation would lead us to prosperity, not with a straight face, because the evidence is completely against you.

I would point out that the Bush tax cuts led to very little job growth and no increase in productivity whatsoever, and helped the economy very little - while putting all of us in a gigantic debt hole. Now, you want Obama to do the same thing. How is that smart?

Cycloptichorn

Plain and simple, it was WW2 that got us out of the depression.
FDR's economic policies actually had very little to do with it, and really accomplished nothing.

Gotta go for a while on some errands, be back later to address your posts.

mm, Congress approved the spending for the war that increased our national debt twice our GDP. All those who had work to build our military might ended up being great consumers after the war. When they started spending that money, tax revenue increased with it, and that debt was paid off quickly.

I'm not arguing that, I agree with you.
However, FDR and his economic policies prewar were actually not working like he thought they would.
It was the war that got us out of the depression, not any actions by the govt.