A BiPartisan Solution To Government Spending and Taxation

The following is from a blog on CNN:

"Obama said the legislation should be Congress' first order of business when it reconvenes this month. Legislators, he said, need to "put aside partisanship and be the leaders the American people need us to be."

He directly accused Republicans of blocking the $55 billion legislation package. Senate Democrats are hoping to OK the package and get it to the president's desk well before November's midterm elections.

Among the provisions in the bill are loan enhancements that would double what small business owners can borrow"

Now here is a jab at laying aside partisanship, without any real backbone behind it. Obama wants Americans to put aside partisanship and work together. That is something we can all agree with: that our leader should lay aside partisan biases to work with both sides, that the President should create bridges between Republican and Democrat conflicts to find agreeable solutions. However he then goes on to accuse Republicans of blocking his $55 billion legislation package.

In behaving as such Obama is a hypocrite. He asks us to put aside partisanship, yet blames Republicans for blocking his package. Republicans do not control Congress. Here are the figures:

Party - Senate - House
Democratic - 57 - 255
Republican - 41 - 178
Independents - 2 - vacant

Obama, you silly partisan, blaming the Republicans for blocking your package. In this vote the democratic party, not the republican party is divided. And why is that? Because clearly not all of the democrats, and hardly any to zero republicans in congress support loan enhancements. The people have elected their congress, a democratic congress, and the democratic congress has voted in opposition to its Democratic leader. And then Obama tells Republicans to put aside partisanship? Hypocrisy!

If Obama were a real anti-partisan, a President who is willing to put aside his bias to work together he would see that bills such as these are not what most of our nation wants. He would recognize that government spending overall adds to our deficit. Even though he wants to keep spending, members among his own party want him to stop. If Obama were really for bipartisanship, and not just one side, he would see that the majority here is in favor against what he is pushing for. If he were really for bipartisanship he would not be throwing the blame at Republicans, furthering the partisan divide.

A typical liberal would argue that a big part of the reason we have our deficit is because of tax cuts which were a bad idea, while on the other side a typical conservative would argue for tax cuts and against government spending.

In the end of the day, the true anti-partisan approach, a united American approach, would be to meet both ends. Not to completely cut taxes and not to completely cut government spending, yet still to cut both. We can follow both lines that the Democratic and Republican parties preach without radicalizing ourselves to one stance. We can work together to solve our solutions, and then not have to worry about them being backtracked when a new regime comes in four years later with a partisan, one sided, solution.

Government spending in social services should be cut-money spent on social service programs steered into improving our quality of life. Government spending on foreign investments are purging our coffers as well, and should also be redirected.

Too much of our tax money goes into social services such as health care and welfare. If we redirected that tax money towards other programs, social services industries can be privatized. Government should not dabble in social services. Right now health care and welfare is a mess, money going down the drain. Building such programs is a move towards socialistic methods of governing, away from the freedom of industry our founding fathers molded this country into. Away from good old capitalism. Remember- no matter how much intervention the government tries to throw into the mechanisms of the economy in the end it is the private entrepreneur that recovers the economy, not the unmotivated man on welfare.

Too much of our tax money goes to foreign handouts and sending our soldiers to die on foreign soil. That is wasted money. Our tax money should go into domestic problems that aren't social issues, into creating solutions for a better quality of life.

What does that mean, you ask? How does one define a better quality of life?

Quality of life involves many factors: wealth being the obvious one. However the most important aspect of quality of life is security. Reducing crime rates ensures a better quality of life. Working on water and electrical services, as well as fixing and building roads creates a better quality of life. A cleaner environment and cleaner air amounts to a better quality of life. All of these things our government programs do not address to the extent that they should, and they are all things we need to work on.

One could argue that turning away from socialistic methods of governance such as free health care is also a partisan stance, as it involves turning our back to the many people who support socialistic programs. However we must remember that encouraging people to look to the government for welfare checks and giving free health care takes away initiative to participate in the modern world's industrial jungle and earn a living through passionate pursuit of a career. Working hard to achieve success in the market has always been both an American and a Capitalist value, and is in opposition to Socialistic values. That large sum of people, unemployed and on welfare, are not acting like true Americans. America is a capitalist government, and socialistic methods of governance are not what this nation was founded on. Socialists and Capitalists working together will always be partisans. We need to find a partisan solution, a Capitalist partisan solution.

If we redirected the money we spend on social services and foreign handouts into fixing our quality of life we would have extra to make tax cuts. That would be a partisan solution. That would keep government spending, instead of eradicating it, moving it to were it's more needed. To were it won't add heavy loads to our already massive debt and deficit. That would not completely remove taxes, but wouldn't raise them either and would not allow them to remain at their current high levels. That is a bipartisan approach.

God Bless