In the world of politics, I suppose the ad is fair enough. Unlike many from the other side, at least it's actually true. But it's not really the point, and it's an unfortunate distraction.
As I've said before, I think the point about The Rominee's business experience is that it has nothing to do with being president (other than, like so many other of his actions, as an indicator of his sociopathy.) It has nothing to do with how government creates jobs, for one thing. His goal was to make money for himself and his investors, and he did. But the way he did it, seems to me, provided him with nothing in the way of experience in running (to the extent that presidents do) an economy. If Ds want to make an issue of Bain, maybe that's it. But it's still a distraction. I wish they'd stop.
The Rominee is out there harping on the deficit. Fair game, also. But the obvious response is to point out, over and over until it sinks in (if that's even possible w/r/t a mind pre-fuddled by Fox "news"), the differences in how the two parties plan to address it. The price we'll pay if Rs get their way. In the name of tax cuts and defense increases, they'll gut the rest of government entirely. Virtually eliminate adequate funding for education, health care, food stamps, environmental protection, child care, research, infrastructure, women's health care... (I really should get a RWS™-like acronym for all that stuff: TSWNTS? The Stuff We Need To Survive...)
That's the message. It's true, and it's important. Critically important. Existentially important.
24/7/180, boys and girls: 24/7/180.
Sometimes communities and private companies working together, rather than government, are more efficient stewards of limited time and resources. Sometimes the .gov is a better option. The difficult part is figuring out who does what best for the lowest cost.
ReplyDeleteAs cuts are made to get deficits under control, I bet we'll see more stories like the one I linked below, which is a testament to what this country can accomplish when the .gov isn't able to meet their needs.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/04/09/hawaii.volunteers.repair/index.html
Regards,
PT
p.s. I guess that answers the question, "BUT WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS?!?!?!"
Do you think the local people now have a little more pride in their town since they built the infrastructure themselves without the help of a benevolent leader?
I agree, PT, mostly. But I don't think the Kauai model is one for the country. My point about The Rominee is that what he did was nothing like what those people did, or, for that matter, what anyone does who builds a business which builds things.
ReplyDeleteAs to citizens taking over infrastructure demands: how far do you think that could go? Ironically, it stems from the anti-tax frenzy: no money to build stuff, so people have to take it into their own hands. It's nice, all right. But I'm a little skeptical that, assuming R budgets were to be in place, we'd be seeing volunteers all across the country building roads, schools, teaching, policing and fighting fires. Offering health care.
Hey, I'd like it. Just don't see it happening. What I'm thinking is that, assuming an R budget and its consequences, and assuming that there's anything left to save, people might finally wake up and say, oh yeah, I guess there's stuff worth paying for. Not holding my breath, of which there's a lot less left than yours.
If we
ReplyDeleteeliminate adequate funding for education, health care, food stamps, environmental protection, child care, research, infrastructure, women's health care…
what would there be left worth defending?