[quote]Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Because to do anything meaningful for the economy, it would require deficit financing. Another stimulus, basically.[/quote]
Incorrect. Businesses begin hiring when their prospects look good and stable for the middle term. Additional deficit spending - and the taxes to cover them, the threats of inflation, and the loss of the strength of the dollar (hello, exporters) - would give businesses pause. This isn’t theoretical - ask a small business owner if you ever venture into the world.
This is called a straw man - nowhere did I support the “policies that got us here in the first place.” My God, why are the left-wingers around here so bad at argumentation?
I don’t support any of the policies that “got us here” - cheap money, privatized reward with socialized risk, unsustainable “growth at all costs!” incentives.
Staw man number two - I think (and have thought for some time) that health care needs massive reform. But all governments must prioritize, and health care was not in a crisis. It simply wasn’t. This was an ideological push - a Social Democrat’s idea of a new “civil rights” (though it isn’t) - not one of necessity.
Moreover, Obama and Pelosi have consistently presented a false choice - that there is their version of “reform” and there is the status quo. It’s nonsense to anyone who thinks, of course - reform could take many shapes and means.
After all, by way of pure hypothetical, even if I supported this “everyone is covered by mandate” approach (and I don’t), why not break it up into stages? Why not do something about the ever-increasing costs first, and then plug the uninsured and pre-existing class into a sustainable system of health care?
Reform isn’t a one way street, and the American people know it. Health care needed to be addressed, but it wasn’t a top priority or a crisis. This was pure ideology in play, and the American people are not thrilled with it.
