President elect Barack Obama made his first speech pitching the need for a massive government infusion to stimulate the economy.
Parts of Obama’s speech sounded eerily like statements made last September as Ben Bernanke talked about the need for his bail out program. Statements like:
We start 2009 in the midst of a crisis unlike any we have seen in our lifetime.
I don’t believe it’s too late to change course, but it will be if we don’t take dramatic action as soon as possible.
and
We could lose a generation of potential and promise, as more young Americans are forced to forgo dreams of college or the chance to train for the jobs of the future. And our nation could lose the competitive edge that has served as a foundation for our strength and standing in the world.
I’ve always been skeptical of the “don’t ask questions, just do as I say approach.” While there are times when debate about how/if/when is not helpful, like when your house is on fire, most situations are not that way. Most situations benefit from some discussion, debate if you like, amongst folks with varying perspectives. In all but the most rare situations you will find that this debate makes for a better action and end product.
There’s a lot to not like about Obama’s proposed stimulus package: the size of it, the increase in government employment, one time tax cuts that were proven last year to have little effect stimulating the economy. However, there was a statement in Obama’s speech that clinched my opposition to his plan. A statement that was intended by Obama, to cause me to agree with his approach did just the opposite. What was the statement? It was near the end of his speech:
That’s why I’m calling on all Americans – Democrats and Republicans – to put good ideas ahead of the old ideological battles; a sense of common purpose above the same narrow partisanship; and insist that the first question each of us asks isn’t "What’s good for me?" but "What’s good for the country my children will inherit?"
Six months ago it is unlikely that many of us had ever used the word “Trillion” in a conversation without it meaning some astronomical amount that it was not credible; it was a charicature of a real number. Today, the folks in Washington talk about trillions of dollars of debt in an off hand manner, as if there were no repercussions or consequences to adding debt in multiples of trillions.
It doesn’t matter who or what your are, an individual, a family, a business or even the government, there are consequences to excessive debt. Unfortunately, the folks in Washington have learned nothing from the sub prime bust and see no problem with dramatically increasing the governments debt. But, I do.
What Barack Obama doesn’t understand is that if we really did make this decision based upon what was good for our children, rather than what was good for us, we would not move forward with his stimulus plan. This stimulus plan is focused on removing some rather minimal and at worst, inconvenient pain from us and loading a great big debt load, along with further government interference on the lives of the Shoelets.
“It’s for the children” may make a good tag line if your campaigning to add a pool to the local high school. In this case, if it’s really for the children, then don’t do it, they’ll do much better without it.
