What America Needs to Return to Normalcy

[sg0508]

What America needs is to re-invest in our education and find another competitive advantage outside of our military.  Cheaper labor in the global economy is killing us and it's making many workers obsolete. Employers are not going to employ an American for $50K per year plus benefits when they can employ someone willing to work more hours in India for $2/hour with no benefits.  It ain't happening

Until that happens, we're in deep trouble.  Globalization got us big time.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I feel like I'm cheating such a tome... with such a simple response... but... bollocks.

OK...

I actually like Romney, I don't think he's out of his mind - but if you think he's Reagan 2.0 you've got another thing coming - Romney is GHW Bush 2.0.

You have such high standards.  Yeah, he's pretty much an arrogant douchebag/opportunist that says anything to get into office.  He wouldn't even be that effective, but I like him because he knows what he's doing. 

lol

I don't think you read my comments correctly.

[Politico]

We need a president who will inspire confidence in Americans that we need not worry about the future.

There is very little a politician can do for that.

Reagan and Clinton were pretty good at it.

[Politico]

Do you work for Romney's campaign? Not intending to be disparaging or anything here, just genuinely curious.

I am currently abroad. While I have connections, I am not going into specifics, and obviously whatever I say is my opinion and my opinion alone, blah, blah, blah.

[Likely Voter]

3rd Quarter numbers just came in.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_162-20126370/spending-lifts-economy-2.5-after-near-stall/?tag=breakingnews

This is great news and shows how Mitt Romney is saving America. Clearly America is anticipating that Mitt Romney is such a great American that they are starting to believe in America again to get America working for America.

[Politico]

What is the alternative? Re-elect Obama and hope things change for the better? I say, "no we can't" to that.

So your solution is to return to the policies that put us right where we are in this mess? Ok.

Of course not. Romney's proposal is like a Clinton/Reagan-style proposal for the 2010s. It is like taking the best of Reaganomics along with the best of Clintonomics, and fusing them together for the 2010s while shedding the parts that do not make sense for this decade.

Obviously that is not what got us into this mess. I can assure you that there will never be another housing bubble.

[Politico]

What is the alternative? Re-elect Obama and hope things change for the better? I say, "no we can't" to that.

YES, WE CAN!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of the fear seems to have been generated by bureaucratic elites who serve as enforcers of tycoons. The Hard Right idea of 'good' competition is that in which working people compete to determine who will be most productive while being squeezed most. Such, if successful on its own terms, ensures 'decline' through degradation of the work force... and something nastier than any 'malaise' that we have known at any time.

Nonsense that is not even worthy of a response. Then again, you are from Michigan, so I am not surprised you are fine with Michigan-style malaise contaminating the rest of America.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Once again:

[Politico]

So after finding out that Obama cannot magically make things better because, alas, he is not magical... you have concluded that Rhymney... is... magical... and will magically make everything better.

This is more like it: After finding out that Barack Obama was unsuited for the executive position that probably should have gone to Hillary Clinton, I have concluded that Mitt Romney is far better suited for the executive position that should no longer belong to Barack Obama. With the right executive in the White House, we will get the right results. I believe Romney has a chance of being that right executive while Obama clearly does not.

[Politico]

We need a president who will inspire confidence in Americans that we need not worry about the future. Until consumers have regained their confidence, there is not going to be a healthy economic recovery that significantly lowers unemployment (i.e., firms are not going to amp up hiring, try new and different things in attempts at growth, etc., until consumers start spending with confidence again). After nearly three years of malaise, Obama is clearly not the president to restore confidence in Americans, so clearly we need a new president instead of continuing with the incumbent. It is not complicated. It is a process the country has undergone many times in the past, most recently in 1992. Getting rid of an incumbent during a malaise is cathartic for the American consumer. Yes, you may personally like President Obama as I do (I have personally shaken hands with the man, supported him in 2008, and think he is a good guy) and you may not agree with any of Obama's opponents on everything or even most things (I certainly do not agree with Romney on everything), but surely we can all agree at this point that a change in leadership is needed. Nothing will change for the better until that happens, so should we wait until 2013 or 2017 for a change? I would choose sooner rather than later. Mr. Obama and his campaign staff might have their feelings hurt, but I am sure they will be fine.

Among the current field, it is obvious that Romney is the most presidential in every way, shape and form. I also believe he is the most likely to restore the type of confidence that has been lacking for many years now. I am really impressed by how much he has come along since first running in 2008, and I feel like this is his time and his turn. He is somebody who understands how the real economy works, and he will send clear signals to firms that he is not going to increase the level of regulations upon them nor dramatically increase taxes to fund pie-in-the-sky ideas and/or unsustainable spending levels. This will eliminate much of the current uncertainty among firms/investors that is adding to the woes we have because of pitiful consumer confidence. But again, the most important thing is restoring confidence in American consumers. It is almost everything. If we can do that and send clear signals to firms that the executive branch of the federal government is not going to get in the way of business, not try to stick its nose where it does not belong, we will see a return to normalcy. Or you can choose more of the same, but do not be surprised when America is still on the decline in 2016. I think the choice is pretty straightforward...

EVERYONE WANTS YOU TO SHUT UP

Another county heard from...

My name is prominently listed below the thread title in the forum. If you do not wish to see one of my threads, I recommend not clicking on them, let alone wasting your time responding. It is rather simple, really.

On a side-note, I do find it amusing how many American supporters of Obama are allied with Europeans who are quietly enjoying their view of America in decline under the Obama Administration. I wonder why Obama is so popular in Europe yet not respected like Clinton, Reagan, and Kennedy were...

[Politico]

3rd Quarter numbers just came in.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_162-20126370/spending-lifts-economy-2.5-after-near-stall/?tag=breakingnews

This is great news and shows how Mitt Romney is saving America. Clearly America is anticipating that Mitt Romney is such a great American that they are starting to believe in America again to get America working for America.

A very disturbing trend has been emanating from the current administration: GDP growth figures are being revised significantly downward in revision after revision as one moves further away from the quarter evaluated. In other words, we will not know what really happened for another six to nine months.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Stop trolling, Mitt.

[King]

Return to normalcy? When did we ever leave it?

[fezzyfestoon]

I'm sick of hearing about "confidence" and consumer spending. How about we not return to acting the way that got us here in the first place? Overconfidence and overspending has screwed us long term. I think a knock back down to reality was just what we needed. It's fairly sobering to be forced not to be able to spend wildly on extremely unnecessary overpriced crap. We shouldn't have been for the last decade, now we literally can't. Pretending we can is impossible now. This economic disaster is just like every other problem in modern America; Ignored until you're absolutely forced to acknowledge it. Then it's too late. We wouldn't be faced with these massive problems all at once if we addressed them before they became dire. But alas, Congress is much more content to make absolutely no waves by taking absolutely no action just to protect reelection. After all, the only thing that matters in American politics is winning the election to protect your special interests.

[Politico]

I'm sick of hearing about "confidence" and consumer spending. How about we not return to acting the way that got us here in the first place? Overconfidence and overspending has screwed us long term. I think a knock back down to reality was just what we needed. It's fairly sobering to be forced not to be able to spend wildly on extremely unnecessary overpriced crap. We shouldn't have been for the last decade, now we literally can't. Pretending we can is impossible now. This economic disaster is just like every other problem in modern America; Ignored until you're absolutely forced to acknowledge it. Then it's too late. We wouldn't be faced with these massive problems all at once if we addressed them before they became dire. But alas, Congress is much more content to make absolutely no waves by taking absolutely no action just to protect reelection. After all, the only thing that matters in American politics is winning the election to protect your special interests.

The one thing that is unaffordable right now is the federal budget. How consumers and companies you do not have a stake in spend/invest their earnings is their business, not yours or mine or anybody else's, so I would suggest avoiding value judgments about people "overspending" on "overpriced crap." Although I am as frugal as most anybody you are likely to encounter, such negative sentiments among the population at large is not going to produce economic growth moving forward. As Adam Smith once put it, "the purpose of production is consumption." Put another way, no consumption = no production = no economic activity, let alone growth (or, if you prefer, no production = no consumption = no economic activity, let alone growth).

Consumers and companies have the means to spend far more than they are, but they are not doing so because they are afraid of the future. We need to eliminate this fear if we want the economy to recover, grow, and create new jobs.

This is the road to recovery. Continuing the madness of $1,000,000,000,000+ deficits for much longer, coupled with a tax-and-spend-and-over-regulate-things-we-do-not-even-understand mentality in the executive branch, is the road to serfdom.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

And... one idea that you conveniently don't mention.

The fact that there is an entire party out there telling everyone how awful the economy is and how "that" man is responsible... it's not just the president's responsibility to reassure the people.

[Politico]

And... one idea that you conveniently don't mention.

The fact that there is an entire party out there telling everyone how awful the economy is and how "that" man is responsible... it's not just the president's responsibility to reassure the people.

He had his chance, and I do not blame people for calling him on his failure. It has almost been three years since he was inaugurated. There is not much of a leg to stand on when this happens:



And I am somebody who likes the president, has personally shaken hands with the man and believe he is a good, honest guy. But that does not matter when you do not get the job done right. And you know what, it is not always the most popular person who gets the job done. I think that is a fitting proverb to associate with Mitt Romney.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

And... one idea that you conveniently don't mention.

The fact that there is an entire party out there telling everyone how awful the economy is and how "that" man is responsible... it's not just the president's responsibility to reassure the people.

He had his chance, and I do not blame people for calling him on his failure. And I am somebody who likes the president, has personally shaken hands with the man and believe he is a good, honest man.

As have I... but you didn't address my point. The GOP's entire campaign is based on rubbishing the economy - and saying the President is the one to blame.

Now, I accept that the President early-on chose the wrong priorities and need to move on jobs. But that doesn't excuse that this is Act III of a play that started before he got there.

If people want to live in a fantasy land that the economy will just heal itself, and like any credit card Bill... if you don't pay it off, interest increases... the amount you have to pay increases, and you need to borrow more to pay that debt... then fine, blame only Obama.

It's happening here too, but it's even more stupid here... since our economy is considering one of the most stable in the Western World (cue Wonkish to tell me yet again that it's all about China ...) you have the Conservatives telling people that the economy is weak and people have never been worse off... when the facts tell us the opposite... but the economic confidence indicators are low.

It's the responsibility of ALL political leaders to promote confidence in the economy - and to use it for political gain (especially when there is decent economic news floating around) is an intellectually dishonest thing to do... sometimes there are more important things than winning.

[Politico]

Now, I accept that the President early-on chose the wrong priorities and need to move on jobs. But that doesn't excuse that this is Act III of a play that started before he got there.

It's the responsibility of ALL political leaders to promote confidence in the economy - and to use it for political gain (especially when there is decent economic news floating around) is an intellectually dishonest thing to do... sometimes there are more important things than winning.

I fully agree with these sentiments, but disagree that the GOP is not giving Obama a fair shake. This is late 2011, not early 2009. We are almost in 2012. The GOP is simply stating the obvious, which has been on the mind of the vast majority of Americans for quite some time: Obama was not ready to handle this job, he has failed in most areas of domestic policy, and he does not deserve four more years.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Now, I accept that the President early-on chose the wrong priorities and need to move on jobs. But that doesn't excuse that this is Act III of a play that started before he got there.

It's the responsibility of ALL political leaders to promote confidence in the economy - and to use it for political gain (especially when there is decent economic news floating around) is an intellectually dishonest thing to do... sometimes there are more important things than winning.

I fully agree with these sentiments, but disagree that the GOP is not giving Obama a fair shake. This is late 2011, not early 2009. We are almost in 2012. The GOP is simply stating the obvious, which has been on the mind of the vast majority of Americans for quite some time: Obama was not ready to handle this job, he has failed in most areas of domestic policy, and he does not deserve four more years.

I disagree with your end hypothesis... but I doubt we'd agree anyway.

[fezzyfestoon]

The one thing that is unaffordable right now is the federal budget. How consumers and companies spend/invest their earnings is their business, not yours or mine or anybody else's, so I would suggest avoiding value judgments about people "overspending" on "overpriced crap." Such negative sentiments among the population at large is not going to produce economic growth moving forward.

Consumers and companies have the means to spend far more than they are, but they are not doing so because they are afraid of the future. We need to eliminate this fear if we want the economy to recover, grow, and create new jobs.

It's not negative, it's realistic. I'm also sick of that garbage. As soon as criticisms come out, it's negative and unproductive. What's negative and unproductive is false positivity. Trying to pretend the problems we face aren't real is far more detrimental than acknowledging that we have problems. A negative rate of savings in the country is an unbelievably shocking and disturbing figure. That's overspending no matter how you cut it. An average of Americans spending more money than they have. I don't know how anyone can say it's inappropriate to call ourselves out there. Same goes for the housing market. I don't see how anyone could argue that wasn't overpriced. And most of the stuff we buy is marked up by astronomical proportions. It's getting cheaper to make things and more expensive to buy them. A lot of crap we buy is also designed to be low quality so we're forced to buy new crap sooner rather than later. Not negative. Realistic.

[Politico]

The one thing that is unaffordable right now is the federal budget. How consumers and companies spend/invest their earnings is their business, not yours or mine or anybody else's, so I would suggest avoiding value judgments about people "overspending" on "overpriced crap." Such negative sentiments among the population at large is not going to produce economic growth moving forward.

Consumers and companies have the means to spend far more than they are, but they are not doing so because they are afraid of the future. We need to eliminate this fear if we want the economy to recover, grow, and create new jobs.

It's not negative, it's realistic. I'm also sick of that garbage. As soon as criticisms come out, it's negative and unproductive. What's negative and unproductive is false positivity. Trying to pretend the problems we face aren't real is far more detrimental than acknowledging that we have problems. A negative rate of savings in the country is an unbelievably shocking and disturbing figure. That's overspending no matter how you cut it. An average of Americans spending more money than they have. I don't know how anyone can say it's inappropriate to call ourselves out there. Same goes for the housing market. I don't see how anyone could argue that wasn't overpriced. And most of the stuff we buy is marked up by astronomical proportions. It's getting cheaper to make things and more expensive to buy them. A lot of crap we buy is also designed to be low quality so we're forced to buy new crap sooner rather than later. Not negative. Realistic.

Please see the edits I made while you were responding (sorry, I did not know you would respond today, or I would not have done the edits).

The only points I would add is that a high savings rate among most of the population does not necessarily lead to desirable results (See: Japan).

Secondly, most things are cheaper or of better quality today versus thirty years ago when you adjust for inflation (my personal recommendation is to do your research if most of your stuff is failing before a year is up. I definitely know where you are coming from because I have fallen victim to that myself. The best you can do is not re-buy the same product by the same company. Try another company's product until you get the value you deserve. That is how this sort of thing gets corrected. Research, and learn from mistakes/bad purchases/investments). Also, let's not forget how many goods/services are available today that were not around 10, 20, 30 years ago. We are progressing.

Finally, what you call positivity I call optimism. And America definitely needs to rejuvenate itself with a good dose of it soon. This malaise is not how things need to be.

[Yank2133]

I have been a lurker for sometime, but even I had to sign up and say something on this massive delusional post by the OP.

Seriously, Mitt Romney is going to restore the "America" brand around the world, the same man who waffles on simple domestic issues like the Ohio union bill, and he some how is going to be a strong leader?

Give me a break! Romney is a rich, pandering fraud who will say anything to get elected. He isn't strong or a decisive leader, he is a good-looking rich guy who believes who only core belief is "I should be president".

Barack Obama may not the strongest leader, but Christ I would take my chances with him then Willard.

[fezzyfestoon]

The one thing that is unaffordable right now is the federal budget. How consumers and companies spend/invest their earnings is their business, not yours or mine or anybody else's, so I would suggest avoiding value judgments about people "overspending" on "overpriced crap." Such negative sentiments among the population at large is not going to produce economic growth moving forward.

Consumers and companies have the means to spend far more than they are, but they are not doing so because they are afraid of the future. We need to eliminate this fear if we want the economy to recover, grow, and create new jobs.

It's not negative, it's realistic. I'm also sick of that garbage. As soon as criticisms come out, it's negative and unproductive. What's negative and unproductive is false positivity. Trying to pretend the problems we face aren't real is far more detrimental than acknowledging that we have problems. A negative rate of savings in the country is an unbelievably shocking and disturbing figure. That's overspending no matter how you cut it. An average of Americans spending more money than they have. I don't know how anyone can say it's inappropriate to call ourselves out there. Same goes for the housing market. I don't see how anyone could argue that wasn't overpriced. And most of the stuff we buy is marked up by astronomical proportions. It's getting cheaper to make things and more expensive to buy them. A lot of crap we buy is also designed to be low quality so we're forced to buy new crap sooner rather than later. Not negative. Realistic.

Please see the edits I made while you were responding (sorry, I did not know you would respond today, or I would not have done the edits).

The only points I would add is that a high savings rate among most of the population does not necessarily lead to desirable results (See: Japan).

Secondly, most things are cheaper or of better quality today versus thirty years ago when you adjust for inflation (my personal recommendation is to do your research if most of your stuff is failing before a year is up. I definitely know where you are coming from because I have fallen victim to that myself. The best you can do is not re-buy the same product by the same company. Try another company's product until you get the value you deserve. That is how this sort of thing gets corrected. Research, and learn from mistakes/bad purchases/investments). Also, let's not forget how many goods/services are available today that were not around 10, 20, 30 years ago. We are progressing.

Finally, what you call positivity I call optimism. And America definitely needs to rejuvenate itself with a good dose of it soon. This malaise is not how things need to be.

Your points didn't add anything. Our consumption is our biggest fault. I'm not saying the singular cure to our problems and all problems is saving, it's a huge first step in solving the US' problems. We spend and waste our money with our voracious appetite for essentially useless novelty goods (as evidenced by the massive use of social networking). If we didn't overspend so much on things that lose value so rapidly (and are designed to do so) we'd have more money to spend on actual growth. The only growth we experience now is in growing the same companies making the same things the same terrible way. Planned obsolescence is something I'm assuming you've never heard of. It's very real and a definite problem we're facing as it grows out of control. Many of our largest industries are built entirely on planned obsolescence. It's lazy business and we eat it up. We buy, buy, buy to replace all the things we throw out after way too little time. It has nothing to do with the things I personally buy, but I appreciate the unnecessary and irrelevant concern.

And whatever you choose to call not solving the problems we face, I'll just keep calling it what it is. It's ignorance at its core.

[J. J.]

What America needs is to get through her thick skull that there is no such word as "normalcy".

It was actually a theme of the Harding campaign in 1920, before any of my grandparents were old enough to vote.

I think we'll see an "American Resurgence" or "Morning in America" type campaign.

[m4567]

I've said this before; I'm not confident Romney can win, unless there's a doubledip. Although, He's slick, he's not really exciting in any way.