Matt
Active member
- Aug 25, 2008
- 1,275
- 0
Anyone who questions Obama's birth place is undermining their reputation as an intelligent preson. Anyone even commenting on that this time around looks weak.
Lets face it, anyone who can do any good for the USA will not be popular with the majority. Drastic change will hurt, and unfortunately many many people are short sighted. They will see that things will look worse for the next 5 years and panic, voting out that president, rather than realise that putting up with some pain now will ease the pain in the future.
As I said above, drastic change is needed, and drastic change isn't easy nor comfortable. Here it is plain and simple, what is best for the country isn't popular. What is popular isn't best for the country. The reason things head down hill is because people don't vote for what is truly best for their country. They vote for what is best for them in the next few years. If a politician starts making the harsh choices that are needed, people will yell and scream because it (usually) hits them harder in the wallet by a few hundred dollars a year in the short (sub 10 year) time frame.
Exactly! While he makes stupid comments about things like Obamas birthplace, he does have some valid points. The problem is that if government were to start imposing large tarrifs on goods imported from countries with unfair, uncompetitive conditions (e.g. China), people would run around screaming about the fact that that government is interfering where it shouldn't and that America is free market- claiming that this interference is "socialism". They wouldn't be happy because at the end of the week, buying the "cheap" Chinese imports from Walmart cost them $10 more.
Unfortunately people blame imports for the destruction of their local manufactures and industry. Imports from other first world, standard wage countries who compete in quality and technical design rather than on low cost actually boost the economy they're imported into. This is because the companies in that economy have to innovate to compete, build the best quality product to survive, rather, than produce the cheapest possible product- where only a 3rd world, super low wage manufacturing base can compete.
Lets face it, anyone who can do any good for the USA will not be popular with the majority. Drastic change will hurt, and unfortunately many many people are short sighted. They will see that things will look worse for the next 5 years and panic, voting out that president, rather than realise that putting up with some pain now will ease the pain in the future.
As I said above, drastic change is needed, and drastic change isn't easy nor comfortable. Here it is plain and simple, what is best for the country isn't popular. What is popular isn't best for the country. The reason things head down hill is because people don't vote for what is truly best for their country. They vote for what is best for them in the next few years. If a politician starts making the harsh choices that are needed, people will yell and scream because it (usually) hits them harder in the wallet by a few hundred dollars a year in the short (sub 10 year) time frame.
I think he's an ego maniac but his view of our big business giving our jobs to China is running us into the ground is dead on.
Exactly! While he makes stupid comments about things like Obamas birthplace, he does have some valid points. The problem is that if government were to start imposing large tarrifs on goods imported from countries with unfair, uncompetitive conditions (e.g. China), people would run around screaming about the fact that that government is interfering where it shouldn't and that America is free market- claiming that this interference is "socialism". They wouldn't be happy because at the end of the week, buying the "cheap" Chinese imports from Walmart cost them $10 more.
Unfortunately people blame imports for the destruction of their local manufactures and industry. Imports from other first world, standard wage countries who compete in quality and technical design rather than on low cost actually boost the economy they're imported into. This is because the companies in that economy have to innovate to compete, build the best quality product to survive, rather, than produce the cheapest possible product- where only a 3rd world, super low wage manufacturing base can compete.