Is President Obama Fixing the Economy?? Yes, Maybe, No - weigh in here

[OhioFiler]

Many studies have shown that the % of fraud in the overall social programs is very small - although I do believe it is more than they are able to find.

It is not the social programs or the people that receive the help that is the problem - it is the lack of oversight of these programs and the repeated cuts in funding to do so.

Our programs don't work because of the political appointees running them - and replaced every time there is an election - and the lack of funds needed to operate. And we all know who the "champions of smaller government" are, don't we?

We Americans are not wired to take our time at anything. - jb

According to you, the government is the solution and more of the government is needed. The programs fail because we don't have enough government bureaucrats? That is laughable.

Don't claim "We Americans" please. Speak for yourself. Some Americans are not liberals and can take their time and don't need the teat of the government to suckle.

[jeb]

just because an elected official "says so" doesn't make something right or Constitutional.

You are absolutely correct - HOWEVER, we elect them, that is how the system works, and if we then sit back while they do things that are unconstitutional then we should vote them out, right? (Hum - did I miss something or is that not just what we did in November?)

Who said Christians are not allowed to judge? - etc.

I am a very, very long way from being a Bible expert but somewhere I seem to remember something about, "Thou shalt not judge", or something like that.

So, IF one claims to be a Christian then, yes, I would think they could not do the things you point out above - unless you also want to call them hypocrites.

If the demand for helping our neighbors is rooted in our religious beliefs then you of all people, being the liberal you are, should DEMAND our government separate Church and State and NOT prescribe to these unsecular principles.

First, I use to be considered a conservative - now, as compared to today's conservative, I am a flaming liberal. Strange, in that I really have changed my believes very little over the years.

Second, I do demand - or at least try too - the separation of Church and State but don't understand why that would stop the government from helping others. Does one HAVE to be religious to help others? Can one not just be a good citizen? - jb

[jeb]

According to you, the government is the solution and more of the government is needed. The programs fail because we don't have enough government bureaucrats? That is laughable.

Now, don't be a Rust Limbow or one of the other Neo-conservative talking heads and put words in my mouth - government is PART of the solution and, in some cases, MORE government is needed.

And, yes, far, far too many programs HAVE failed because of not enough government. Please tell me why you think we have had failure after failure after failure - by the FDA, the SEC and on and on.

Drug recalls, food problems (as we speak, today) the whole mess on wall street - WHY did we have all these problems?

Let me guess - it was all those "terrible Liberal Democrats". - jb

[justbroke]

I am a very, very long way from being a Bible expert but somewhere I seem to remember something about, "Thou shalt not judge", or something like that.

That verse, from Matthew 7:1, has to do with false judgment. It actually reads, "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." That's all. it doesn't just say... "do not judge". You really have to read the whole Chapter (Matthew 7) to understand where the teaching was going.

Other than that... I'm not joining this discussion.

[jeb]

That verse, from Matthew 7:1, has to do with false judgment. It actually reads, "Do not judge, or you too will be judged." That's all. it doesn't just say... "do not judge". You really have to read the whole Chapter (Matthew 7) to understand where the teaching was going.

Other than that... I'm not joining this discussion.

Ah, come on, JB - dive in, the water's fine.

And I did say I didn't know much about the Bible. - jb

[JRScott]

One thing missing from the Amish discussion here is the tax breaks they get. Like so many others, they use their "religion" to get around most of them. And like the rest of us, every time they sell something they are using what the taxpayers paid for to get some of the raw materials to make it or ship it or ?

How has one very small group of people managed to get out of paying their fair share, serving in the military, etc., as have the Amish?

They have a good racket going - just like so many others out there that have found a loophole to use. - jb

Service in the military is voluntary.

However they do have a religious adherence to pacifism. So even during the era of the draft they were often given assignments outside of actual combat.......for example medical or clergy roles.

Other religions for instance Mormons do actually encourage folks to serve in the military. (However most Mormons who do join do so at older ages because they generally serve their missions first).

Amish pay sales tax just like everyone else.....

Religious non tax status only extends to the actual church and its holdings, not to individual members property. (Otherwise how could they tax 90% of the country.....). It also doesn't extend to corporations owned by the church. For example Bonneville Communications is owned by the LDS Church, but still has to pay property taxes and corporate taxes.

Now you raise an interesting point, should religious holdings be tax free. There is no stipulation in the constitution that they be so. Generally it was granted as an offset for the free services and care generally offered in communities by religious organizations. While we could tax them, it would probably hurt charitable work such that the poor would suffer more than they do now. Still I see no constitutional issue about taxing them.

[JRScott]

They do good if you like living in the 19th century. It's not a very free society either. I have to admit I admire the simpleness of the Amish but at the same time I know I and most other people could never live that way. One thing about them I find ironic, although they appear to be a self sufficient society, in reality they are not. Like it or not, they exist only because others have protected their culture and fought all the wars for them when more advanced and powerful aggressors came knocking at the door. It's an interesting society but once again, an impractical one.

I do agree that we are too spoiled with luxuries and many other things that are not essential. It simply amazes me how many people making $50 to $100 grand a year have financial troubles. I could live like a king on that money.

What I think is saddest is the disconnection in society that technology has brought.

Folks through the internet and television feel more connected to people they will never meet in person than they often feel towards the guy who lives next door, who's name they may not even know.

[JRScott]

You are correct; however, my state, Arkansas, does not have such Programs. We don't even have Unions in Arkansas. I had a small 401k, but had to use it, while I fought for 2 yrs. to get my disability. My Attorney received over $7,000 and he didn't do squat except sign 2 pieces of paper.

However, look at California. My Aunt who will be 80 lives there. She has severe Diabetes & knee surgery on both knees. She just hired a lady to live with her who is paid by the State at $8.00 an hour. I'm truly concerned with her well-being as she hired this lady from an ad. Lady gave her a phone number as a reference and she call it and liked what the person said, so she hired the Lady.

My brother who lives 5 hours away from her is outraged at her, but states she is trying to show her Independence. I call it oneronous which runs in our family LOL! We are keeping in close contact with her and this lady (who I don't even know her name, YET).

California has gone to the Extreme, as far as, my brother is concerned. Think about that Lady who just had those 5 babies and has, I think, 6 other children and doesn't even have a job. She is living off of California's welfare reform system.

You think California's Welfare system is working? I don't.

The reasons the states do not have these programs is that the Federal Government took the power unconstitutionally from the states. Indeed many of the welfare programs and other entitlements could be managed much more effectively on the state level than the federal level as it could be tailored to each state's need.

That is the beauty of the constitution, it realized that one shoe does not fit all and that all but the most basic services were better handled by the local and state governments than an overreaching federal government.

[jeb]

That is the beauty of the constitution, it realized that one shoe does not fit all and that all but the most basic services were better handled by the local and state governments than an overreaching federal government.

And the problem of that is that the States can more easily bend to a vocal minority or can be "purchased" for a lot less money that the Federal Government. But the problem of having enough money for the "buy my vote" boys and girls in DC has long past gone away.

Also, as we have seen in the past, the majority in a State can discriminate against whom ever it wants - blacks, Jews, Indians.

This is what has brought about many of the Federal Laws we have now - because the States refused to protect the rights of ALL its citizens. - jb

[JRScott]

And the problem of that is that the States can more easily bend to a vocal minority or can be "purchased" for a lot less money that the Federal Government. But the problem of having enough money for the "buy my vote" boys and girls in DC has long past gone away.

Also, as we have seen in the past, the majority in a State can discriminate against whom ever it wants - blacks, Jews, Indians.

This is what has brought about many of the Federal Laws we have now - because the States refused to protect the rights of ALL its citizens. - jb

I don't know what country you are living in, but every D and R in Congress is beholden to various special interest, the majority of which are not even based in their states.

The Federal Government I"d say is far more corrupt than the State governments. (I'm pretty sure every member of the North Carolina Executive Branch has paid their taxes.....can't say the same for the feds....)

To give you an example in North Carolina, the state senators and representatives make only 20k a year as compared to your US Senators and US Representative who make more than 8 times that. As a result you generally get people that are far more willing to listen to the people when they write in because they aren't there for the money, they are generally there because they want to help even if their own views may differ from your own. Our state senators and representatives usually keep their other jobs, and our legislature only meets for a short time each year to take care of the state's business, rather than parading around before the media trying to get as much attention as possible while doing the least possible which is what the US Congress does.

I guess you never read the US Tax code which is the most discriminating law in the land......

[OhioFiler]

And the problem of that is that the States can more easily bend to a vocal minority or can be "purchased" for a lot less money that the Federal Government. But the problem of having enough money for the "buy my vote" boys and girls in DC has long past gone away.

Also, as we have seen in the past, the majority in a State can discriminate against whom ever it wants - blacks, Jews, Indians.

This is what has brought about many of the Federal Laws we have now - because the States refused to protect the rights of ALL its citizens. - jb

Typical liberal. America is evil. Can't trust any American.

I have an optimistic view of our citizenry. Most libs are pessimistic.

What rights don't the states protect? Only ones I can think of are the unalienable rights of the unborn.

[thefiredevil]

I think he is... its just that this job is not very easy. It takes a lot of time and tough researches and studies to accomplish it positively.

[blankslate]

Typical liberal. America is evil. Can't trust any American.

I have an optimistic view of our citizenry. Most libs are pessimistic.

What rights don't the states protect? Only ones I can think of are the unalienable rights of the unborn.

Funny, I have a lot of liberal friends and I've never gotten that opinion.

Honestly it's this closed minded bias that is getting us nowhere. You're either with us or you're an idiot because I said so. It's c**p. I can see both sides of the spectrum and really don't understand why no one in congress can.

I'm optimistic about the future. I saw the current state of our economy coming long before anyone else did and tried to warn people but everyone looked at me like I was a nut. I'm probably the only person right now that really does feel hopeful. Things are going to level out now and people will figure it out. I've been living in shambles for 5 years and I hate to see others crashing down to the same place but at least I got a head start.

McCain couldn't have done any better in this amount of time. He didn't have a plan at all or even acknowledge what was happening until it was undeniable. I actually liked McCain for many years and when he announced he was throwing his hat in the ring, I thought right away I would vote for him. I didn't, he didn't impress me in the end.

Cant we just put our right and left opinions aside and just be glad someone is at least working on the problem? I would've been happy if the last administration had addressed it and at least tried.

[jeb]

What I think is saddest is the disconnection in society that technology has brought.

I think we can all agree with this. - jb

[jeb]

I don't know what country you are living in, but every D and R in Congress is beholden to various special interest, the majority of which are not even based in their states.

JR, I agree with your first statement. I have never - and never will - say that the majority of the Democrats don't fall into the same mold as the Republican Hypocrites - it is this total "closed mind" that far, far too many Republicans have that I can't tolerate - my way or the highway - on every issue.

The Federal Government I"d say is far more corrupt than the State governments. (I'm pretty sure every member of the North Carolina Executive Branch has paid their taxes.....can't say the same for the feds....)


As for the second, don't necessarily agree with this due to the cost of "buying" a State official is far, far less than on the national level.

Being from North Carolina, when I was growing up, the Sheriff of Buncombe County had been in office for about 30 years - it was said he could take a drunk out of the drunk tank and make him Governor of the State. In those days, the Sheriffs were THE power in the State.

I guess you never read the US Tax code which is the most discriminating law in the land......

Ref taxes - we know about those that have not paid their taxes only because they have had to be vetted - maybe vetting should be a part of EVERY elected officail, local, state and federal. We could made a BIG dent in the federal debt.

And you are certainly correct about the tax code being the mosty discriminating law in the land - TOTALLY LOADED AGAINST ALL BUT THE RICH AND POWERFUL.

IF those loopholes in the code that protect Corps and the rich were closed, everyone's taxes would go down dramatically. You and I pay more taxes every year that some living in million dollar homes - one of several they own - and make millions every year.

I paid more taxes when I was making very little than I did when I had a 6 digit income - all because of loopholes I could afford to use when I had the money. - jb