Just who does President Obama think he is?
Does he really think he–or anyone he can possibly hire–is smarter than the collective wisdom of millions of investors, millions of workers, millions of account managers, and so forth? In other words, does he really think a handful of people stuffed up in a Washington D.C. bureaucracy can really do a better job than regular old Joe’s across America?
It’s absurd to think he is as smart as we wish he were.
Conservatives understand that they–nor any other group of people–are smart enough to tell anyone else what they should do with their lives. Instead, it’s better to leave people with as much freedom as possible so that they can decide what is right for their situations. Yes, we teach morals and values and principles, but we don’t pretend to know how to organize the medical industry, or the banking industry, or any other industry.
That’s the bottom line.
If you think Washington D.C. knows more than your stock broker, or your doctor, or your grocery store, or your gas station, or whatever, then go ahead and write them and ask what you should do each day. Otherwise, demand that they get the heck out of your way and let you live your life in the best way you know how.
February 28, 2009 at 1:03 am |
In principal, I agree with you. In fact, the millions of ordinary Joes across the American spectrum of occupations and businesses, have a collective wisdom that translate into market forces – millions of people and businesses acting in their own best interests are the best real indicators of what needs to be done. I believe that if the free market was allowed to do what it does best sans govt interference, we would have the best possible outcome in the shortest amount of time.
I disagreed with the bailouts from the get go, and opined that the least expensive, fastest(not to mention fairest) route to recovery, would be for the badly needed market corrections to occur, and if this meant that millions of irresponsible homeowners were foreclosed on, and mismanaged businesses went belly-up, then so be it. Badly-run businesses should be allowed to fail(that’s part of Capitalism, after all), and in the case of the irresponsible home-”owners”, they could always move in with the responsible homeowners and freshly-minted responsible EX-renters – as tenants. I think the foreclosures NEED to happen, the sooner the better, and the sooner banks repo their properties, the sooner responsible renters can buy them at a now much more realistic price-point, and get them off the banks’ books.
THAT BEING SAID, however, Obama is no Ron Paul, never pretended to be a Ron Paul, and was voted-in by (what was it, 53%?) of the voters who apparently didn’t want a Ron Paul-type in the White House.
Obama inherited a helluva mess from 8 years of Bush mismanagement, and now the same 53% that voted Obama in – many of whom are of the entitlement mentality, feel housing and healthcare are a “Right”, and look to the govt as the answer to all their problems(instead of seeing it as the cause of much of our current problems, as I do)are clamoring for him to “DO something” about the economy – something govt can’t “fix”
(regardless of which side of the Republicrat/Demopublican Duopoly happens to be in power), is something I believe the govt shouldn’t even TRY to “fix”, and could and should only help by drastically cutting it;s own spending, and letting the private sector and market forces do the rest.
Obama is “doing something” because that’s what his constituates want. Fear often breeds irrationality, and there is no shortage of the former these days – I suspect that even some who didn’t vote for him are looking for him to “DO something”, as well. Under those circumstances, what’s a guy who isn’t a Ron Paul gonna do? Why, he’s gonna “DO something”, even if that something is only going to prolong the economic downturn and make it ultimately even more costly, and put us deeper in debt then we were just a few short months ago. In short, Obama is “doing something”, because that is what is expected, if not demanded, of him. And in his defense, he is facing a huge problem with very little ammo in his arsenal of tools to adequately address it. To use a bad metaphor, Bush turned over the keys to the rental car to Obama, but left him with an empty tank and a maxxed out company gas card.
I’d be interested in hearing what a McCain Presidency would be doing right about now, had he won instead.
TRUE Conservatives, maybe, but they are few and far between. The vast majority I have spoken to, debated with, or read about, are the more common faux-conservative variety. IMO, neither the Republican party nor the Democratic party represent anything remotely close to your definition of “conservative”. If you want folks that actually, truly believe in the conservative principals you outlined, I suggest you give the Libertarians a whirl, for they are MUCH closer to our ideals than either side of the Mainstream Party (intentionally left singular).
February 28, 2009 at 9:35 am |
I understand the frustration with the Democratic and Republican Parties. Let me be clear, President Bush did some things right, and messed up a lot of things. he certainly was no conservative, although he pretended to be when he ran. (I still remember is promise of abolishing the Department of Education and regret that I ever fell for that canard.)
Regardless, joining a third party is a sure way to get sidelined in this political system of ours. Our form of government is built in such a way that you either support one candidate or the other, or you throw in the towel and hide in the hills. We don’t have a system like other countries where you can have multiple parties that form coalition governments.
Rather, if you have sentiments as I do that limited government is the only acceptable government, then you should be working in one or both parties to get like-minded individuals in key leadership positions and elected as representatives. That’s the only way you can change things. Sure, the parties stink. Sure, it’s hard to fight with an established party from within. But it is not impossible.
Remember that Reagan was running against the Republican Party of his time as much as he was running against the Democratic Party. Goldwater, too, was an anti-republican republican. Both, and indeed, all conservatives, are and were and forever will be resented by the party elite. You can’t sit on your hands and feet and zip your lips and expect that Michael Steele or anyone in a leadership position in the party is magically going to say, “Let’s shoot our own collective political feet by refusing to accept political bribes.” No, that kind of change has to come from us and without.
Ron Paul is the right kind of formula. I disagreed with him on many issues, but he understood that if you want to have any chance at changing things, you have to stick an R or D next to your name and then bring in all your friends to overwhelm the party. Libertarians and other conservatives should learn from that and stick and R or D next to their names to take over the parties.
Regarding the comment that you have to let things fail, It’s political suicide to say it the way you do. You have to term it as getting the cruft and failure out of the system. You have to focus on allowing other people a chance to get into the system.
Failing banks means that there is going to be a fire sale on office space, bank branches, and bank assets. It’s imperative that we give up-and-coming successful and wisely managed banks a chance to take over these assets and see if they can make it work, and let the failing banks get out of the way.
For housing, if you’ve found yourself in the position where you simply can’t afford the loan, then it’s time to let someone else come in and get a chance to buy the house. Falling prices are good since new people can get in the market, people that have been responsible with their money and need housing as much as you do. Let them have their chance as you had yours.
By interfering in these markets, we’ve prevented up-and-coming rising success stories from coming to full fruition. Instead, we’ve made failure the status quo and preventing success from being even more successful.
Imagine if we did the same thing on the internet and bailed out Yahoo! and thus denied Google a chance at taking over the ad space and search market!
February 28, 2009 at 8:13 am |
Excellent post. I really loved the last paragraph!
May 20, 2010 at 12:53 pm |
He is just a regular person. Just because he’s the president doesn’t mean he is smarter then you or me. He’s just someone crazy enough to take on being the president of the united states.