Share
President Barack Obama is certainly not a socialist. In fact, he is more of a Tory, as some media sources in America and even the BBC have stated.
Elected on the Democratic Party’s platform, he resembles much more closely Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford — moderate Republicans. He has been very pragmatic, his foreign policies have often mirrored Republican policies, and he has tried to work with Republicans.
Obama’s economic policies have not hurt the economy — it is up for debate whether or not the stimulus, for one example, worked or not. According to the “Washington Post,” six studies say it did, one said it only partially worked, and two said it did nothing.
GDP is rising at a slow but steady rate of 2 percent, Wall Street is largely back on its feet, and the housing market is coming back, with more people buying new or preexisting homes, which is causing the construction industry to gain momentum. Those are only a few of numerous areas where improvement is evident, and while the economy is still in a fragile state, it is moving in the right direction.
Unemployment recently fell from 8.1 percent to 7.8 percent, but then rose to 7.9 percent within the past two weeks. This is not a troubling sign, though. This increase indicates at least a small amount of confidence in U.S. workers, as more have decided to actively look for work again.
Under Obama, Americans are paying the lowest taxes in 30 years. According to Factcheck.org, taxes were at their lowest in several decades when Obama took office, and then lowered again in his first year.
In fact, middle-class citizens received some major tax breaks during his first term, going largely unnoticed. Not all taxes have remained at the same rate or have been lowered; indeed, taxation for the healthcare legislation as well as for numerous miscellaneous things has increased.
With the passage of the healthcare bill, the U.S. now has universal healthcare. It is not a flawless piece of legislation, but overall provides numerous benefits to Americans of all age. In addition, healthcare costs and premiums have stabilized and are rising much more slowly than they had over the past decade.
A version of this article appeared in the Nov 15 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 19 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
Absolute Garbage.
Tax rates will remain "close to the current rates"? I suppose that is true if you are in the majority who DO NOT PAY TAXES. For those who actually fund the federal budget, the next four years will be brutal punishment. Eventually the productive will grow weary of being spit upon, and simply give up. Of course that will be followed with a column by you berating them for their "greed" and lack of compassion for their fellow man.
Reply to this Top
Yes, I'm sure increasing tax rates by 3 percentage points on income above $250k will cause the 2% of people affected by it to "grow weary." Just as they were weary for most of the 20th century until the Bush years, when our economy went into overdrive.
Reply to this Top
Why is it so necessary to tax high earners that much more? I just get this sense of "stick it to the man" mentality, but I don't understand why and my intuition is that it comes down to envy even though even the poorest people in this country have it really good. The fiscal problem is a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
Top
Actually the first 5 years of Bush were great for the economy. When he came to office he inherited a recession that was left by Clinton. The tax cuts he inacted got us out of that recession within 5 months. They should have expired soon after but hindsight is 20/20.
Top
Only the beginning.
You "pay-their-fair-share!" people always fail to recognize that the tax burden has been continually pushed to the higher end of the income spectrum for decades (yes, even under Bush). Apparently it helps you sleep better at night to know that someone who worked harder than you is being punished for it. All we have to do is sieze more of their income (and eventually their wealth), distribute it "back to their victims" and all will be right with the world! (disclaimer: that "world" will be dark, cold, and lack the basic necessities of life....but there will be JUSTICE!)
Reply to this Top
Just because someone's income is higher than others' income does not mean they are necessarily working harder than others.
Also, more of the tax "burden" has been pushed onto wealthier individuals only because wages for the middle class have been stagnant for over three decades, while the incomes for higher class individuals has grown exponentially.
This is not "redistributing" the wealth and punishing the wealthy. If anything, it would take us back to the more balanced system before the theory of horse and sparrow economics took over the government. Besides, numerous reports and studies have shown that tax cuts are not what spur business and economic growth, it tends to be the tax increases that do that.
Such was the case when Reagan was in office. Indeed, he cut taxes, but the economic growth during that period occurred after the often ignored increase in taxes under his administration.
And as someone whose family was greatly affected by the recession and lost a lot because of the banking industry, I can assure you as well as others like yourself that there were victims in 2008. The fact that you look down upon people who were taken advantage of by corporations is disgusting, and not only does it prove you are not mature enough to talk about these issues, it also shows you are completely ignorant to what has gone on within the political world over the past several decades.
Reply to this Top
BS. With a few exceptions (there are always exceptions...even someone as "ignorant" as me knows that), people at the top of the income spectrum DO work harder than those at the bottom. These are people that have risked everything to start small businesses, taken on massive debt to eventually become a successful surgeon, work 70-80 hours a week, and rarely take vacations. In contrast, those at the opposite end perform a menial job for an agreed-upon wage, then go home without any additional burden or responsibility. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with you comparing the two, and saying one does not "work harder" than the other. That type of nonsense disqualifies you from handing down the judgement of "ignorance."
As for the shifting tax burden, I again call BS. The current tax structure in the US is one of the most "progressive" in the world. It is so "progressive" in fact that nearly have of those filing returns have either ZERO liability, or end up with a nice bonus check from the other half. Forgive me if I have a hard time accepting that as "fair."
Reply to this Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
Author needs to take an Economic class. Obama is a disaster for the private enterprise system.
Reply to this Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
This comment was deleted for violating our comment policy.
Top
http://www.maccosmeticwholesaler.com/source mac cosmetics locations http://maccosmeticsfree.webs.com/
Reply to this Top
hi!,I really like your writing so a lot! share we communicate more approximately your post on AOL? I require a specialist on this house to resolve my problem. Burgher http://gameteen.net/micro-racers-2/
Reply to this Top
yqkkatg <a href="http://www.timberlandschuhede.eu/22-womens-timberland-14inch-stiefel/" title="Frauen Timberland 14inch Stiefel">Frauen Timberland 14inch Stiefel</a>
Reply to this Top