Thursday, November 04, 2004

How Will We Unite? 11.04.04

from the nytimes-- a fractured nation.

or from the national review-- bush doesn't need a mandate.

2 comments:

roger said...

This is more a comment about yesterday's blog. I'm upset that Kerry lost. I'm not upset b/c I think that Kerry had a better vision for Iraq (he didn't have a clear plan either), and I'm not upset b/c Kerry would have gotten jobs back (the economy is a cyclical thing), I'm upset b/c the Bush team plans on dismantling the social services set up in the new deal. The big problem with the Bush administration is that they are going to screw things up for generations to come. The tax cuts are not about trickle down economics. The tax cuts are not about spurring the economy. The tax cuts are part of a philosphy called "starve the beast" which tries to bankrupt the government in order to strip all social sevices away from governmental control. The trickle down theory of economics is a ruse so that people buy into the tax cuts. If the Bush administration has their way, all of the New Deal programs (social security, medicare, etc...) will be bankrupt and be sold of to corporations. This is bad for all of us. It's not that Kerry has a great vision for America, but it's that his vision does not include the destruction of government sponsored social services.

The other great problem with this administration is that there will be several Supreme Court positions open in the next 4 years who will be replaced with Ultra-conservative Scalia look alikes. This will have repercussions for decades!

These are the reasons this defeat is so detrimental to this country. :(

On a lighter note, guess who has a date on sunday!

Pico said...

i bet you have a date.

that was mad sharp, mr havenswrth. just like we can't afford healthcare when people pay out of pocket (hence the idea of having a government supported safety net-- not fully socialized healthcare as some would have us believe), we can't afford the privatization of social services such as the police force, schools, et cetera; the costs are high, the free market allows competition but not necessarily accountability (see: the Edison School contracts and what they do to approach their outcomes... which they fail to do), and the quality may be questionable.

we don't realize the true economic value of these services, and that those services we take for granted may one day be optional. and who really wants to be playing market risk with their retirement fund? yes the market will net you money... but lower-class people would be working against upper-class people with more access to information-- assymetrical information. which can lead to market failure.

the government is supposed to be the bridge between imperfect markets and the needs of the people.

spank the girl once for me, as a side note.