Top ten political failures

[Pliny]

Well, the top ten are things that we have seen in the news and argued here on the forum. There are thousands of government programs we never here of and thus never know of the unforeseen circumstances they create.

If one wants to make money one just has to be on the inside of what government is going to support.

Cash for clunkers (No. 10), heralded as a great success by liberal minded individuals caused all sorts of distortions in the auto market. And definitely didn't help the poor who generally buy used cars. The price of used cars went up markedly because of their disappearance from the market. Did it help the environment? It took some older, less energy efficient cars off the road probably quicker than they would have come off the road, perhaps. Did it stimulate the economy? It benefited car manufacturers. Sales were up for a couple of months but the program ran out of money from the taxpayer. It cost them a ton of cash. But since when does it make economic sense to pay to remove products from the market so that new ones can be sold. If that were a great idea we should all just replace our existing stuff whether we needed to or not.

Ethanol subsidies, the housing bubble, affirmative action, we can see and herald what they claim to be doing but at what cost economically and in unforeseen circumstances.

[Michael Hardner]

Pliny - was there supposed to be a link here ?

Edited December 19, 2010 by Michael Hardner

[Bonam]

Yeah where are the other 9?

[jbg]

Number 1 political failure would have to be Barack Obama. I'll leave others to fill in 2 through 8 though if Canadians were on the list I'd insert Michael Ignatieff, Dave Miller, Gordon Campbell, Helena Guergis and Ed Stelmach.

[bush_cheney2004]

I guess this was the original subject...[FOX NEWS WARNING TO SENSITIVE CANUCKS]

[Argus]

Number 1 political failure would have to be Barack Obama. I'll leave others to fill in 2 through 8 though if Canadians were on the list I'd insert Michael Ignatieff, Dave Miller, Gordon Campbell, Helena Guergis and Ed Stelmach.

Obama should have set his first priority as campaign financing reform. Your whole country is headed downward because so many politicians are simply being bought - entirely legally, by wealthy corporate and private interest groups. I mean, when you have corporate lobby groups actually writing legislation - then hiring the senators/congressmen who get it passed - that's a pretty sad indication of who those politicians are working for.

And the fact they don't even try to hide any of it is just amazing.

[bush_cheney2004]

...And the fact they don't even try to hide any of it is just amazing.

Agreed...in Canada they actually try to hide it.

America is the same as it ever was...including monied interests influencing government. Going "downward" has worked to build a successful nation.

Edited December 22, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[dre]

Agreed...in Canada they actually try to hide it.

America is the same as it ever was...including monied interests influencing government. Going "downward" has worked to build a successful nation.

Do a bit of research on how big the special interest lobby is today compared to 30 years ago, and how much money it spends. Its true the concept isnt new, but special interests today are way way way better at it, and the lobby is 100's of times as large.

[jbg]

Obama should have set his first priority as campaign financing reform. Your whole country is headed downward because so many politicians are simply being bought - entirely legally, by wealthy corporate and private interest groups.

The problem is that the U.S. Supreme Court has just struck down all restrictions as a result of our (relatively) absolute First Amendment protections for speech. Our amending formula plus the fact that this Amendment is at the cornerstone of our Bill of Rights makes changing it flatly impossible.

[Pliny]

I guess this was the original subject...[FOX NEWS WARNING TO SENSITIVE CANUCKS]

Yeah...that was it.

[Pliny]

Do a bit of research on how big the special interest lobby is today compared to 30 years ago, and how much money it spends. Its true the concept isnt new, but special interests today are way way way better at it, and the lobby is 100's of times as large.

This is what universal democracies that can vote themselves favour and entitlements turn into, democracies of special interests. Politicians being only human or less, support the special interests that keep them elected.

[Pliny]

Yeah where are the other 9?

I mentioned four altogether. The top one was healthcare. But watch the video.

[Yukon Jack]

I have a "clunker" that is 8 year old and still runs like Swiss watch at 350,000 kilometers. It is a Toyota Sienna minivan. My wife's "clunker" is a 2000 Toyota Corolla, which runs just as well.

Junking vehicles like these are insanity of the highest order.

[nicky10013]

The problem is that the U.S. Supreme Court has just struck down all restrictions as a result of our (relatively) absolute First Amendment protections for speech. Our amending formula plus the fact that this Amendment is at the cornerstone of our Bill of Rights makes changing it flatly impossible.

See, the thing is though, money isn't speech. Money is money. If you want a company to buy as much airtime extolling why they think a certain politician is the best, let them do that. That's speech. However, hundreds of thousands of dollars flowing into both democratic and republican campaigns in brown untraceable envelopes? That's not free speech, it's legalized corruption.

[GWiz]

Can anyone here explain to me why anyone making less that $250,000.00 NET votes Republican? If US (and considering Harper's spending habits, Canada too) "conservatism" is forcing an additional $800 BILLION dollars in debt on hard pressed "ordinary" Americans (those making "ordinary" incomes) then God Bless America, he's the only one that will...

[sharkman]

Wow, not one defender of Obama and his idiotic cash for clunkers program? There is hope after all. That was one of the stupidest 'help industry' ideas ever and single-handedly demonstrated that Obama doesn't have a clue how the economy works.

[bush_cheney2004]

Wow, not one defender of Obama and his idiotic cash for clunkers program? There is hope after all. That was one of the stupidest 'help industry' ideas ever and single-handedly demonstrated that Obama doesn't have a clue how the economy works.

To be fair, President Obama hasn't done any worse than those who are suppose to know how the economy works.