America has problems, but America is NOT THE PROBLEM!~
To many taxes kill Competition
Published on January 2, 2009 By Moderateman In Politics

Here we are in another year 2009 came in with a whimper. We are being told that we are in the worse "recession" ever {read depression} since the 1930's. The President-Elect believes the government can spend our way out of this problem. He wants to have a "second stimulus bill " on his desk on January 20Th, so he can sign it. The purpose of a second stimulus package is to get the country spending again. The first one failed dismally since responsible citizens used the money they got to pay bills instead of going out and spending it for toys and getting into more debt.

There is in our history an American Statesman named Henry Clay who said " I would rather be right than to be President." It was Henry Clay who became known as "the great Pacifier" He much like our President-Elect thinks we can negotiate with our enemies. Because of his compromises of 1850, Clay attacked both Abolitionism and Slavery, Believing that they would expire naturally. Clays compromise alienated the anti-slavery states, and that ended any chance he might have had for the presidency.. Clay learned by sad experience to believe, in his older years, Of all human powers operating on the affairs of mankind, none is greater than competition. {socialism pretty much kill competition} So far unless we let Obama turn this great "land of the free home of the brave" into a socialistic European model country we still have competition. WE cannot let this die off just to please a few people, while the vast majority believe that this country is great because of capitalism, not some watered down form of communism.

If we the people remain silent I believe that a President Obama will turn America into a country we will not recognize anymore.


Comments (Page 1)
on Jan 03, 2009

alot of people dont see it like this.... in fact they look at "who will give me the most free handouts"

 

Fact guys and i dont care what you say. Ive seen so many examples of this that its put me in the spot where people want something for nothing and not have to work for it.

on Jan 03, 2009

You're right, into one we won't recognize because hopefully, finally we the people will be able to see pass the dismal life that so many seem to lead!  Competition is always good I agree Elie, because having a monopoly is never good for consumers. Our leaders make decisions they think will help its people, sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.  Everyone learns by trial and error.  It is with hope that I do look forward to what 2009 will bring, because without hope, what else is there? It is this hope that ushers in a new team in the White House, will they be given the chance to lead?

on Jan 03, 2009

watertown1978
alot of people dont see it like this.... in fact they look at "who will give me the most free handouts" Fact guys and i dont care what you say. Ive seen so many examples of this that its put me in the spot where people want something for nothing and not have to work for it.

This is what the Democrats feed on, the hopelessness of poor people, they get elected on it by promising free handouts, it''s kind of like their platform is "vote for me and I will give you money"

on Jan 03, 2009

foreverserenity
You're right, into one we won't recognize because hopefully, finally we the people will be able to see pass the dismal life that so many seem to lead!  Competition is always good I agree Elie, because having a monopoly is never good for consumers. Our leaders make decisions they think will help its people, sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.  Everyone learns by trial and error.  It is with hope that I do look forward to what 2009 will bring, because without hope, what else is there? It is this hope that ushers in a new team in the White House, will they be given the chance to lead?

I to hope for the best from Team Obama, but truthfully all I see so far is just another politician.

on Jan 03, 2009

Of course, the Republicans aren't too much better than the Democrats when it comes to turning our country into the next Soviet Union.  Bush ignored the bailout plan when he could have vetoed it, in essence tacitly agreeing to it.

And yes, I agree Moderateman, the Democrats definitely make a point of the "vote for me and I'll give you [insert random lie here]."  There isn't a thing that Obama has said that FDR or others hadn't said before him, especially that universal health care one.  And yes, Obama and virtually all Democrats are socialist.  They figure we should fund these programs with a "little" bump in taxes for the rich who can afford it, "spreading the wealth," as it were.  We all remember Joe the Plumber, don't we?

on Jan 04, 2009

IQofSpam
Of course, the Republicans aren't too much better than the Democrats when it comes to turning our country into the next Soviet Union.  Bush ignored the bailout plan when he could have vetoed it, in essence tacitly agreeing to it.And yes, I agree Moderateman, the Democrats definitely make a point of the "vote for me and I'll give you [insert random lie here]."  There isn't a thing that Obama has said that FDR or others hadn't said before him, especially that universal health care one.  And yes, Obama and virtually all Democrats are socialist.  They figure we should fund these programs with a "little" bump in taxes for the rich who can afford it, "spreading the wealth," as it were.  We all remember Joe the Plumber, don't we?

If you close your eyes and just listen the Republicans sound much like the liberals of old. I switched to the Republican party in 2003 after being a long time Democrat, now I am thinking it's time to switch to something else again.

on Jan 04, 2009

Moderateman

IQofSpamcomment 5Of course, the Republicans aren't too much better than the Democrats when it comes to turning our country into the next Soviet Union.  Bush ignored the bailout plan when he could have vetoed it, in essence tacitly agreeing to it.And yes, I agree Moderateman, the Democrats definitely make a point of the "vote for me and I'll give you [insert random lie here]."  There isn't a thing that Obama has said that FDR or others hadn't said before him, especially that universal health care one.  And yes, Obama and virtually all Democrats are socialist.  They figure we should fund these programs with a "little" bump in taxes for the rich who can afford it, "spreading the wealth," as it were.  We all remember Joe the Plumber, don't we?
If you close your eyes and just listen the Republicans sound much like the liberals of old. I switched to the Republican party in 2003 after being a long time Democrat, now I am thinking it's time to switch to something else again.

 

You know there is a nice person that would do wonders for the country... or even a party, and its not the Rep or Dem right now....

 

on Jan 04, 2009

having a monopoly is never good for consumers

Not so - having a monopoly can actually be better than having the 'ideal' of perfect competition, due to research. If no new technology/improvements could be developed then perfect competition would be better. However because of such things there are certain markets where a monopoly is actually the better option, and this is shown by the granting of patents by governments. Patents are in effect providing a company with a monopoly over a product for a set time period - it means the company can then spend tons of money researching a product and know that if it turns out to be amazing they get to make their money back, as opposed to having competitors offer their invention for far less. Don't allow the monopoly and that research won't get undertaken at all, meaning consumers can end up with inferior products at higher prices.

Furthermore, if you have say 100 similarly sized companies competing in an industry, neither one of them is large enough to undertake extensive research. Furthermore any research is likely to be duplicated by other companies. So you could end up with lots of those companies researching the same thing - wouldn't it be more efficient to have just the one larger company spending that money on the research?

If we the people remain silent I believe that a President Obama will turn America into a country we will not recognize anymore

I thought that was the whole point of having the election? So you the people could choose what sort of country you would want to have?

on Jan 04, 2009

maudlin27

having a monopoly is never good for consumers
Not so - having a monopoly can actually be better than having the 'ideal' of perfect competition, due to research. If no new technology/improvements could be developed then perfect competition would be better. However because of such things there are certain markets where a monopoly is actually the better option, and this is shown by the granting of patents by governments. Patents are in effect providing a company with a monopoly over a product for a set time period - it means the company can then spend tons of money researching a product and know that if it turns out to be amazing they get to make their money back, as opposed to having competitors offer their invention for far less. Don't allow the monopoly and that research won't get undertaken at all, meaning consumers can end up with inferior products at higher prices.

Furthermore, if you have say 100 similarly sized companies competing in an industry, neither one of them is large enough to undertake extensive research. Furthermore any research is likely to be duplicated by other companies. So you could end up with lots of those companies researching the same thing - wouldn't it be more efficient to have just the one larger company spending that money on the research?


If we the people remain silent I believe that a President Obama will turn America into a country we will not recognize anymore
I thought that was the whole point of having the election? So you the people could choose what sort of country you would want to have?

No alot voted for "the black man" or " hope and change"

 

What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the reprocussions would be

on Jan 04, 2009

What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the reprocussions would be

Then they get the government they deserve, and will just have to wait until the next election to put their vote to better use. It's a bit late (and slightly hypocritical) to start shouting about those repercussions if they were only just given the chance to have their direct say over the next government.

on Jan 04, 2009

No alot voted for "the black man" or " hope and change"

What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the repercussions would be
watertown1978on Jan 04, 2009

Exactly, and there never was any kind of definition of what "hope and change" looked like except there would be more handouts for the terminally lazy.

on Jan 04, 2009

maudlin27
What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the reprocussions would be Then they get the government they deserve, and will just have to wait until the next election to put their vote to better use. It's a bit late (and slightly hypocritical) to start shouting about those repercussions if they were only just given the chance to have their direct say over the next government.

The greatness of living in a Democracy is the ability to scream and yell all we want to with no fear of repercussions

on Jan 04, 2009

maudlin27

What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the reprocussions would be
Then they get the government they deserve, and will just have to wait until the next election to put their vote to better use. It's a bit late (and slightly hypocritical) to start shouting about those repercussions if they were only just given the chance to have their direct say over the next government.

 

I didnt vote for either of the fools.... write in FTW!

on Jan 04, 2009

Moderateman

maudlin27comment 10What they didnt look at besides all the freebies was what the reprocussions would be Then they get the government they deserve, and will just have to wait until the next election to put their vote to better use. It's a bit late (and slightly hypocritical) to start shouting about those repercussions if they were only just given the chance to have their direct say over the next government.
The greatness of living in a Democracy is the ability to scream and yell all we want to with no fear of repercussions

 

Yep and I love it though I wish some kind of knowledge into the canadates would be manditory too in order to vote... O well who knows OB might do great things and I hope he does for the sake of the country... but its more or less the majority made thier beds and they can sleep in it

on Jan 05, 2009

However because of such things there are certain markets where a monopoly is actually the better option, and this is shown by the granting of patents by governments. Patents are in effect providing a company with a monopoly over a product for a set time period

But that has nothing to do with competition, and everything to do with allowing the inventor time to recoup the cost of the invention.  Monopolies, even when state run or managed (utilities) are bad.  Because it does not respond to the consumer, and wastes a lot of resources on non-productive venues.

I guess because of the desire of others to lionize FDR, it is necessary to kill that myth once and for all.  It will be painful, but it is inevitable.  So many other nations have already realized the truth that government does not create wealth, just consumes and destroys it.  America has to learn it as well.