Perhaps Richard, THIS is where our opinions differ...
 

Richard,

I may be wrong, but I see we have a difference of opinion and, I'm thinking, it boils down to this:

YOU have hope.

I think it is too late.

My opinion is this; if we were to somehow replace every single politician and political appointee in the next few years,

swept every incumbent at every level, including the $800,000.00 a year City Manager of Bell, CA,

and everyone appointed to a gov't "job"...

out of office and replaced them with (and go with whatever political leanings you want, all right, all left, all extreme right, all extreme left, centrists)...

it wouldn't make a bit of difference.

And I think there is where we really disagree. You have HOPE for a better tomorrow for your children and future generations via

"Enough of us yelling at them together, and voting them out, will make a change."

I just don't see how.

My HOPE lies in the community of man, in the individual who is part of a bigger picture and working with people and not governments, big business nor special interests groups.

I feel that politics as a vehicle of change is beyond repair.

But I do hold out hope for the individual and the community.

Gordon

I wonder if...
 

Hi,

I wonder if part of the problem is that Obama isn't giving everyone enough "Hope"...

Copywriting and entrepreneurial maestro Joseph Sugarman states a theory is that the US President acts like a "father figure" for people.

When this father figure is weak, we become weak too and lose our confidence...

However, when this father figure is strong, we also become strong too and gain more confidence...

Obama hasn't been looking very confident lately, I'd say. It seems to me that he hasn't looked very strong in the face of the Gulf oil spill (although apparently it's plugged - for now, anyway)...

It seems to me that, when it comes to the President, impressions can become reality - because the impression everyone gets can affect everyone, psychologically...

Here's an old post I wrote on this topic (back in 2000)...

http://www.sowpub.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2002

And here's an article on this topic from the Telegraph (a British newspaper), about Obama's impression of "impotence"...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...lame-duck.html

I also read another article which points out that Obama's tone has changed...

The article said: The "Yes we can" chutzpah was gone. It's more: "Perhaps we can't before the next election."

The point is - this could be one of the big sources of a feeling of hopelessness... We need a "father figure" who radiates confidence, to give the nation confidence too.

Obama seems to have lost his confidence.

Best wishes,

Dien

Re: Intrusive advertising is THE cornerstone of capitalism...
 

Dien...

I agree. I saw this coming back in Jan. I made this vid... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1jxVr9hDic

Cheers.

-- TW

Re: Intrusive advertising is THE cornerstone of capitalism...
 

Hi TW,

That's not exactly what I mean, but, anyway...

If the president is like a "father figure", then we tend to follow the president's "vibes".

When the president looks out of touch and overwhelmed - as Obama seems to be lately - it doesn't help the country's confidence! And people get pessimistic about the future...

Best wishes,

Dien

Re: Intrusive advertising is THE cornerstone of capitalism...
 

My vid makes somewhat the same point.

He's becoming a well-meaning, but ultimately ineffective + incompetent president -- which is similar to what Carter became.

-- TW

I 100% disagree with both of you
 

Dien:
The article said: The "Yes we can" chutzpah was gone. It's more: "Perhaps we can't before the next election."

The point is - this could be one of the big sources of a feeling of hopelessness... We need a "father figure" who radiates confidence, to give the nation confidence too.

Reality:
1. Obama has passed health care, the biggest government take-over in US history, a socialist dream for a hundred years ... despite more than 50% opposition of the American public. No other president ever did anything remotely close to this. Incredible achievement for Obama & the lefties.

2. Obama has passed a trillion-dollar stimulus bill, for which our children and grandchildren will be paying their whole lives, despite overwhelming opposition of the US public.

3. Obama has passed the financial reform act, giving incredible power to government, without so much as a word about two of the biggest sources of the financial problems - government agencies Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. The fine print in this bill may be big government's biggest win of all.

Obama has changed this country more in 18 months than any president in history in that period of time ... IMO, it's not even close. He has created the socialist state that he had in mind when he started.

Hopeless? You gotta be kidding me. He's ecstatic, and he wants more.


TW:
He's becoming a well-meaning, but ultimately ineffective + incompetent president -- which is similar to what Carter became.

The truth is exactly the opposite. He's very effective, very competent, and very evil.

On the plus side, a lot of the American public is now mobilized against the socialists, which gives hope for the future.

Richard Dennis

Re: I 100% disagree with both of you
 

Not discussing Obama's politics. Discussing political bents and happiness levels.

Here is a list of top 10 happiest countries in the world:
http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/14/wor...lup-table.html

Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, the Netherlands, Costa Rica, New Zealand, Canada, Israel, and Australia.

Whats the common denominator?

Overwhelmingly they're socialist democracies. Big governments. High taxes. Cheap or free health and education.

82% people in Denmark think they are thriving. Compared to 57% of people in USA. (India is doing very very poorly...)

As one commenter on Reddit jests:


Being of a libertarian bent, I hate high taxes and government involvement. But seems like overall, the population is happier when their basic necessities are taken care of by the government.

Seems like - if we take Maslow's hierarchy - the bottom layers of the pyramid should be guaranteed by the government to make people happier. The bottom parts should not be left to merit.

Is there a way to provide the bottom needs to everyone without raising taxes and increasing the size of the governments? I'm not sure... your thoughts?

Wow
 

Ankesh,

THAT is the argument you want to make?

That people are happier with less freedom, less money, and more government?

Do you really believe that?

If so ... wow.

Richard

Re: Intrusive advertising is THE cornerstone of capitalism...
 

Ankesh,
I think you are misreading this poll. The majority of Americans reject the "my government owes me" mentality. Europeans may be happy with their socialism but Americans are not. The further we move away from a Democratic Republic and get closer to socialism the less happy as a nation we are. I always hear how Americans can't export their idea of democracy and expect the rest of the world to be happy with it. I would say the same for European socialism. You can't bring it to America and expect the average American to be happy with it. That's what we have with liberal America, European socialism. Just my thoughts.

Also, America was the top of the list when it came to personal freedoms. I don't think we are even in the top ten now. The further away we get from a Democratic Republic and the closer we get to European socialism the less personal freedoms we have. I prefer the personal struggles and more personal freedoms. Again, just my thoughts.

Scott S.

The "dependency" mindset...
 

Hi Richard and everyone,

These "socialistic" type systems generally transfer wealth from richer people to poorer people...

So the richer types are generally unhappy with them (and often flee the country - the "tax exiles"). A lot of rich Europeans move to Monaco, for example, which has no income tax. Apparently, 84% of the population of Monaco is made of up of wealthy foreigners, most of whom are probably there to escape the high taxes of their home country.

(It is easier to become a "tax exile" if your income is from a business, though it's harder if your income is from a job.)

However, some poorer people may be happy with this approach - as they have the government looking after them. I think the main danger is that this can foster a "dependent" mentality - as Goofy sang in a cartoon, "Oh, the world owes me a livin'!"

That's a bad (and personally destructive) attitude to have!

It's easy to get unemployment benefits where I live (Australia), and I've known people who have been living off of unemployment benefits for decades, in some cases.

I've seen what happens - it often creates a "dependency" mindset. You don't "have" to actually do anything - because every couple weeks or so, the government gives you more money. That actually saps your creativity and resolve.

Why work hard to create new things and come up with new ideas, when you don't have to? These people are also often unhappy, in my observation - because creativity and being independent are two of life's pleasures!

One lady I used to know a little spent all day watching TV and eating junk food. That was her life. Collecting unemployment benefits every couple weeks, and the rest of her time was spent watching TV, and eating junk food. She made absolutely no positive contribution to society. And she was unhappy - but of course, it was somehow everybody else's fault, not hers. When I see a person like that, I think - what a sad, sad life.

Anyway, this "dependency" mindset is a big danger to be aware of!

(For the record, I've never received unemployment benefits - which is a choice I made, when I saw how destructive the "dependency mindset" could be. Whenever I've gotten myself in a hole, I've always figured I'd do my best to use my own resources to get myself out of it!)

Best wishes,

Dien