I continue to see it: people supporting a movement that seems to be totally against their own best interests. I suppose that racism is at the core for at least some of those people. They can point to all these reasons to dislike the direction the black President is taking the country, but don't critically examine what they're saying simply because it seems to be a non-racial reason for not supporting someone who they dislike mainly for racial reasons. In other words, if Bill Clinton was doing exactly the same thing, would they be so opposed to the direction he was taking?

People certainly weren't so upset when Ronald Reagan did the same sorts of things back in the 80's, to pull the US out of a recession then. The difference: The level of the debt at the beginning of their term and the cost of things today versus then. I believe the percentage of debt increase was greater for Reagan, and for Bush II, than it is for Obama, but I could be wrong on that. The point is that the same sorts of actions, the same direction was taken back then.

What is it about the fact that wealth is becoming more and more concentrated in the top 1% of people in this country that people can't latch onto? I mean, this trend is indicative of the real problem with managing our debt and our deficit. The problem isn't with that small percentage of money that is going to help poor and hungry folks. The problem might actually be related to the cost of medicare and medicaid, but the only attempt at addressing the rising cost of medical care in this country (Obamacare) is berated and ripped, even though it was so watered down that it wasn't anything like what the President actually wanted. Once the bought-and-paid-for Congresspeople and their owners in the insurance industry got done with it, it does look more like a boondoggle for the insurance and pharmaceutical industries than it does a real reform. However, there are good things in there - things that will help the little people. The idea that a company cannot continue with this "pre-existing conditions" stuff is an excellent start in my opinion. There are other very good things in the bill.

Anyway, the problem boils down to the fact that the country is spending money on things like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, not to mention the elephant in the room (DEFENSE!), and revenues continue to plunge. Yet banks and businesses are reporting solid profits, record profits in some cases. Where is that money going? Not into hiring American workers, apparently. Maybe it's going into the pockets of those business owners (shareholders and board members and such) and further concentrating the wealth.

Trickle down? Not a chance!!!

So what's the solution? Get mad at Washington and demand that we, through our government, quit paying for the social safety net, forget roads and infrastructure improvements that would benefit everyone, don't pay those lazy unemployed people benefits so they can maybe keep making house payments and put some sort of food on the table, cut back on spending money on education (because someone said that we shouldn't like the stuff those teachers are teaching the kids anyway...science and math and language skills and such), and let everyone keep more of the money that they "earn".

Especially the really really rich people. They "create jobs" (cough cough) so they need to get richer.

Taxes are evil.

To me, taxes are the fees I pay for living in the United States, for having my kids get a first rate public education, for having my mother get a little help for all the years she and my dad worked (SS and Medicare) and for having roads and fire and police and yes, national security, and some regulations so my money in banks can't be squandered and my food isn't tainted and my drugs live up to rigorous testing standards before they are served up to me.

(Shrug) Seems like not THAT bad of a trade off.

But it seems like people are determined to get what they've been told they "want" or "need". So why should I continue to care about it?

*****