2008 Presidential Platforms on the Economy
Posted by jemartynowski on May 2, 2008
Currently, citizens of the US are trying to decide which candidate running for POTUS will be the least intrusive on our rights in a capitalist society. Let me give you good links to their platforms in their own words:
Verdict: More than a little concerning. He has some good ideas, such as simplifying the tax prep procedure. The scary part is the “Technology, Innovation, and Creating Jobs” portion. First of all, as President, you should have no power to do such things. Second, if you are going to disregard the Constitution, you probably shouldn’t do it two-fold. Spending money on all of the things he wants to, such as “Barack Obama believes we need to double federal funding for basic research,” are just plain unconstitutional. Who gets that money? How about “Obama will also provide assistance to the domestic auto industry to ensure that new fuel-efficient vehicles are built by American workers?” When government money is given, especially to large corporations like that, it creates more corruption and puts less money in the individual’s pockets. Finally, he will raise minimum wage. Seriously, aren’t we past this? We all understand basic economics, right? That just eliminates jobs. It sounds good, but we all know how it’s going to end.
Verdict: Not bad, if true. The gas tax holliday sounds great, but needs to be fixed permanently. That’s kind of a lot of money that goes to the federal government every time a trucker fills up to deliver our food to grocery stores, and that needs to change. His HOME loan idea is a little less scary than Obama’s whole “just re-write your loan if you don’t like it” idea. Still, too much government intervention where it shouldn’t be allowed. His tax policies, once a major concern, seem pretty solid. Not the greatest, but the best of the three in terms of creating jobs and keeping American companies from getting hit hard. The change of corporate tax rates would provide a huge boost to the economy. We’ll see where his alternative and simpler tax system goes. Oh, and his elimination of pork spending would be the greatest possible thing to happen to this country, but I doubt it’s potential to happen. He’s still a wild card to me
Verdict: A mixed bag. She does claim to want to keep the tax cuts already in place (which is odd, considering she keeps trashing the Bush administrations “policies” on this, which are the tax cuts), which is a good thing. However, she claims that, to restore a balanced budget, we need “to fund new expenditures with new revenues or cuts in other areas.” Sounds good, but she definately wants to spend more, so guess what that means? That’s right, more taxes!!! She, like Barack, thinks “Investments in alternative energy can create new jobs for the 21st century” Again, sounds good to the people, but they don’t get what that means. Please, leave these new innovations to private industries. The government screws up everything it touches, do we really want them controlling this? Finally, I will say that lines like this: “Empower our workers and ensure that all Americans contribute their fair share,” appear all over her site. There is a type of controlling attitude in some of these statements.
Conclusions: Remember, this is just based on what they each claim on their campaign sites. Not what they will actually do. Our we really even thinking of voting for people who actually come right out and say they will do something completely against the Constitution? What say you?