Willard vs. Obongo
Hey everyone,
This is my first post! So I hope I actually get a few people who reply.
So everyone knows that the elections are coming up in just a little bit. As a Republican, it's really undeniable that Romney is looking to cut rates as much as possible for everyone- but in particular, big business. Trickle down economics, whether right or wrong, has been the economic policy of the reds for 30 years now, and according to what Mitt Romney says, it looks like if he is elected president, we're going to see more of supply siding.
Now despite the fact that most of the people on this forum is comprised of people mostly living/currently residing in the northeast (typically strong Obama), there is a large amount of Romney support. As bankers, traders, etc etc, we all know that from an individual standpoint, Romney is the better of the two candidates, as he will foster the kind of environment that would benefit us monkeys:
-lowering individual taxes
-lowering corporate taxes
-destroy dodd-frank etc
-trickle down economics
-More money to business, more hiring of SAs and FTs
No matter what way you look at it, whether or not he's actually a legit guy, Romney would probably help us make more money/ do better in the field of work.
However, let's say if we were considering things from a holistic perspective- for the good of the country, not just ourselves on an individual level. Do you guys REALLY agree with Romney's tax plan? Or do you think it's serves disutility to the country on the whole. Opinions?
oh, and i suppose obamacare and medicare etc can be discussed, since that's so strongly connected to economics/tax
Ultimately, the financial industry is going to pare down a bit in the post-financialization period, don't expect a boom for quite some time. Also, restructuring America's budget is going to require another president altogether: I am hopeful but realistic about anyone being able to reduce the deficits and encourage accelerating growth for the forseeable future. The last decade and the the resulting recession took a severe toll on the economy and also the general level of confidence in the markets. Remember that the recession started and the debt doubled under the tenure of a 'conservative', and the GOPs rhetoric has become severely disconnected from reality. The dems too are running up the debt, but they have not made finances a large rhetorical priority until relatively recently, so it's not easy to pin them down on this issue at the moment...but this will change.
Ultimately, a set of somewhat younger or at least outsider politicians...both democratic and GOP...will be needed by 2016/20/24. The current set of operatives are far too entrenched in debates that have lingered since the 60's and 70's, as well as becoming increasingly mired down by partisan constraints. Fresh thinking is going to be needed by those who aren't so beholden to the establishment of thoughts and money. We live in an age where young voters and digital media are a very relevant factor, so that has to be considered as well. Obama isn't quite as entrenched, but many of his advisors are, and I see his legacy being defined more in terms of restoring stability to the system than encouraging growth. It may come, but I've been following this stuff pretty carefully for 15+ years and my best guess is that a whole new set of faces in Washington are needed before systemic overhaul is going to happen.
Sometimes it's really an issue of waiting for a generation to die off....
willard gillard
Here's an example of why the current system is likely going to overhaul itself, and it's only one example on one issue:
There's a major priority that neither party has seriously addressed: student debt. The origins of the debt aside, this will be a HUGE drain on the next generation, and the current set of politicians didn't build their careers or mindsets with this reality accounted for, so they are somewhat out of touch. Look for a moment at a relatively simple set of concepts. The simplest way of dealing with the student debt issue is: (1) the government buys out the bulk of student debt and assumes the responsibility of administering it, not unlike they did with bailing out the banks.
(2) force reform in college expenditures and accreditation and be more selective with subsidized funding, and actively promote the profitable and culturally vital areas
Or some variation therof
Theoretically speaking, it's entirely possible but such an effort would take either (1) very aggressive action on the part of one party or more likely (2) cooperation between all in Washington. That an entire generation is largely putting a large chunk of their first 5 to 25 years of income towards servicing a type of debt that wasn't much of a factor in previous eras hasn't even been acknowledged beyond a pretty rudimentary discussion. Should have and could have beens are irrelevant but the debate is mired firmly in the past.
Increased ecnomic activity is definitely a part of this as well, but it's really a huge act of denial to absolve one's self as a politician of actually confronting this issue. Obama is one of the few presidents in history to have had to deal with substantial student debt but even his blue chip post graduation employment as a lawyer somewhat distances him from seeing what many people deal with. I look at guys like Paul Ryan, Cris Christie, and a whole host of new democratic upstarts that either paid their way through school or borrowed to gain access to the workforce. Given our parents' and grandparents' generation vote stuanchly in their interests, it will be a while before student debt is taken seriously as a political issue. So, we're literally waiting for a new generation of people to step forward and assume leadership on issues such as these....or for younger and more focused people to step forward and win.
Ok, that's enough of this, no more politics until after the election.
I view him as the lesser of two evils, or more accurately, I'm being forced to choose between a socialist douchbag and an untrustworthy turd sandwich.
My point wasn't that Romney would solve the problems of BBs, but would more likely create an environment where corporations would fare better relative to the 'middle class'- whatever that means
Architecto tenetur temporibus quidem qui est saepe. Laudantium aut consequatur assumenda neque vitae. Repudiandae ut numquam doloremque pariatur voluptate. Eveniet nemo aut molestias. Quis ut ut neque nesciunt voluptatum eos. Numquam magni dolorum aut deleniti soluta optio. Quos ut porro eos quibusdam aperiam quisquam.
Aperiam quod a aliquam eos qui quia. Quis asperiores facilis est perspiciatis. Aspernatur est aut accusamus nihil. Porro consequatur quia similique veritatis rerum quidem dolorum. Hic nihil dolor quos deserunt labore velit totam. Nemo sunt facilis id aut ut tempora.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...