Prickly issues ...
Republican presidents since Benjamin Harrison (1889-1893) have touted the "trickle down" theory of economics wherein the government "stimulates" (simulates?) big business with low or nonexistent taxes and no regulation of how the businesses do business. The benefits of higher employment and greater competition are supposed to trickle down to Joe Sixpack (giggle, wink) and make him prosperous. It has never worked, and I now hear both candidates using the phrase. I am not easily surprised, but those words coming from the mouth of Democratic candidate Barack Obama took me aback! It seems to me these gentlemen (sarcasm) are just a two headed coin when it comes to economic policies, and their basic difference is that John McCain is more closely tied to George W. Bush's pathetic rape of America's middle class taxpayers, along with its working poor, and the ill.
The thing that gets me is the voters keep on believing! They seem to think the marriage of big government and big business will result in better times for them, their families, and the nation. They never realize the consummation is spewing forth nothing but dead sperm in the form of rhetoric, and dead financial sperm will not impregnate their nest eggs!
----
If these companies which are receiving the bailout money were troubled manufacturing firms, I might look at it differently. Actually, the businesses benefiting from this giveaway deal only with money; they produce nothing tangible. Do we really need them being as huge as they are?
2 comments:
Trickle down to the rich mans sons and daughters. We get nothing from this at all. In my opinion the Republican party stands for BIG government in that they want to take of the rich corporations and screw the little man. Then they pray on the fears on the rest of us so we vote for them.
And I often wonder what the real core values of the Democratic party actually are.
At least you know where the republicans stand on a daily basis.
If the average person actually believes that big government and big business as good for us we are doomed. Of course they way most people spend money they do noy have and live on credit we are doomed.
No we do not need "money business" to be so big. We do need more manufacturing firms. We should have been taking care of this years ago. We had better watch out if GM, Ford or Chrysler go under.
Those companies and companies that produce goods for them employee a large number of people. The state of Michigan would be come a ghost state.
I too worry about our domestic car makers. Other "old American" companies like GE and Goodyear seem to be controlled by foreign investments, particularly from the Middle-east. Even the maker of Budweiser beer was recently acquired by the Dutch.
I think both political parties have become pawns of big business, and so much big business is controlled by outlanders that we will never get it back without temporarily nationalizing our business interests. We must return ownership of America to Americans. Socialism? Yes, but we brought it on ourselves.
Mark, I believe this nation is past the point of no return. It has destroyed itself from within by allowing too much control from offshore and from middle class greed and complacency.. The rich have been greedier than ever, and haven't been one bit complacent! Until the American people get over this two-party system of either this-or-that and force the elected leaders to work for us, nothing will change for the long term good.
Post a Comment