On the one hand, during the Great Depression Roosevelt's heart was in the right place. But his socialist policies, for the most part, were a dismal failure. They probably caused the Depression to run deeper and longer than it would have if government had stayed out of the economy and let the bad times run their natural course. We're reminded, however, by Barack Obama's designated chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, that "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." What better time could there be to grow government and a reliance on it than during a struggling economic period? I guess there is no better time, and Obama has jumped on the opportunity as quickly as FDR did.
Government is the problem
The major social problems of the United States have been produced by, in appearance, well-intended actions of government programs. Surely, Obama's hope and FDR's heart are in the right place; unfortunately, the act of pushing forward with idealistic misconceptions of reality creates long-term issues that takes generations to recover from. Both Roosevelt and Obama's actions are a blueprint for failure, showing us exactly why government is the problem.
According to both Barack Hussein Obama and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "It [is] the government's job to straighten out [the economic crisis] and do it as quickly as possible." Acting upon this assumption with such recklessness as we've seen will destroy the economy. The cancerous growth of government spreads all across the United States punishing our economy with high unemployment rates. Private companies are firing — private sector jobs are on the decline. Government is hiring — government jobs are on the rise. To pay for these jobs, U.S. taxpayers and private businesses are being heavily taxed, either directly or through inflation to finance government borrowing.
In other words, money better-well spent by private corporations that would be investing for economic growth, prosperity and job creation, the government is instead taking the money (through increased taxes) and spending it on public job creation. The government is not a business and therefore offers no economic incentives for driving innovation and future prosperity, so as long as more money and jobs are taken from the private sector, the more our economy will stall. Our economic plateau will continue for as long as socialism thrives in America; economic risk will cease and real job creation will decline while the realistic threat of socialism remains in the United States.
According to a Rasmussen poll, 59% of the United States agree with Ronald Reagan—government is the problem.
How the cancer spreads
Understanding the difference between the self-interest of individuals when they are engaged in the private sector and the self-interest of the same individuals when they are engaged in the government sector is only part of the answer to the problem Obama is recreating. The result of America's cancer is a government system that is no longer controlled by "we, the people." Instead of Abraham Lincoln's government "of the people, by the people, and for the people," under Roosevelt and now Obama we have a government "of the people, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats," including the elected representatives who have become bureaucrats.
Side-effects of a Big Government Cancer
The most burdensome taxes for the largest number of Americans is caused by a cancer of epic proportions. Obama and his part socialist, part communist team in the White House (Obama's version of bipartisan politics) isn't looking out for the American people; Obama is looking over the American people and dreaming of creative ways to soak up more power. It's all about him, he is part of America's cancer which feels no remorse for the victims it swallows in its path.
The unemployment problem
Between 1932, when FDR was elected, and 1940, unemployment averaged more than 17 percent — the high being 24 percent and the low about 12 percent. In 1940, it was near 15 percent. Today in 2010, Obama has set in motion his own version of Roosevelt's New Deal for America, with a plan to "transform our economy," by forcing a political reform that is most certainly impeding economic recovery. Less than one year after Obama's socialist regime took control of the U.S., unemployment hit 10.2% in our country. Those numbers are skewed of course, as 10.2% unemployment is a low estimate and is not accurate.
According to Rush Limbaugh, 10.5% unemployment is equal to about 21% in the real world. Unfortunately for the United States, in Barack Obama's America, high unemployment is going to last for "years." This is a cancerous side-effect of a big-government, 'Tax and Spend' socialist agenda. Everyone suffers except for the politicians controlling our government, the lobbyists who control the politicians, and of course the big labor unions. As America's cancerous growth of government gets larger and larger, the peoples liberty and freedom gets smaller and smaller.
Roosevelt's administration was when the United States was first diagnosed with cancer. Roosevelt damaged America, he hurt the economy and prolonged the Great Depression. Just like Obama, Roosevelt's soak-the-rich policies turned out to be 'Tax and Spend' policies, all of which dried up the kind of private business capital and corporate investments that could have done more to revive the economy than anything the government did. The cancer eventually went into remission but it has since resurfaced, President Obama is foolishly following the exact same path of destruction that Roosevelt took during his war against prosperity.
Falling standards of living
Here's another side-effect America will endure because of this cancer. Since government generally does not produce anything, and it doesn’t create wealth and more often destroys it, living standards will erode. From a socialist point of view, I guess this is OK for as long as everyone suffers together? It's the same idea of socialized health care, as long as everyone receives poor quality health care together, it's suppose to be "fair." Despite this misconception of fairness, it's really far from it.
The reality is that this form of cancerous government is not fair at all. Is it fair to "we, the people?" Nope. Does this cancer as government give handouts and special privileges to the SEIU and other Big-Labor unions? You bet they do. They benefit from your loss of employment, the economic plateau, and a falling standard of living. What about the bureaucrats—do they benefit? Absolutely. In fact, more apparent now than ever, many in Congress have made it publicly clear that "we, the people" are a burden; we're a massive hurdle they must jump over before pushing forward with their own agenda. America suffers altogether, but while the unions thrive, the rest of America fails—together, as one—so it somehow makes socialism "fair." Socialism is nothing more than the impression of an ideal state with perfect equality.
The workings of a nation-crippling cancer
The idea behind much of the Democrats current actions is that, by forcing a greater reliance on government, the people will begin to feel entitled to government handouts and begin to rely on government; in turn, with the help of strategically spewed progaganda from state-run media, the people somehow feel compelled to re-elect socialist democrats because these are the same bureaucrats who promise more "freebie" government handouts than their counterparts. For these politicians, it's all about power. It's all about getting re-elected. It's why many local congressmen will steal federal money in the form of a bill or legislation to pay for state run projects and boost local voter support, a loophole in the United States Constitution otherwise called earmarks.
Roosevelt succeeded to some extent in redistributing the wealth, but just as we're seeing today — it didn't improve the economy. Class warfare was a strong characteristic of the Roosevelt administration, who berated the 'evil rich' as part of an evil capitalist society. The exact same passion against capitalism and against prosperity is seen in Obama's character, too. Before he was elected, Obama told interviewer Charlie Gibson that he would raise taxes on capital gains even if it meant that tax revenues were reduced. The goal is to simply take the money from the "rich," a capital gains tax is one tactic used to redistribute the wealth. The result of redistributing the wealth isn't to help the economy, it's to create more reliance on the government. So in this case, strategically, it makes sense that the cancer would sacrifice long-term tax revenues for the short term benefit of growing more reliance on the government: who cares if in the long-term the government cannot pay for it, right? The narcissistic cancer thinks only in the short term, and on how to get more power and votes today. The growing cancer see's that if it can buy more votes in the form of government handouts, surely as the government grows it can take on more debt later to fix the long-term problem that it's creating today.
It's part of an overall strategy used by Obama's administration, strengthening the growth of government by funding leftist vehicles for future propaganda, such as ACORN and the SEIU, while also weakening the country's economic abilities to fight against its illness. The more money that a cancerous government can siphon from the private sector and give to the SEIU and other labor unions, the more they will have to spend on attack ads, or robocalls attacking Conservative candidate's, and other methods used to attack any and all opponents of a big government agenda. In turn, of course, making it much less likely that a reliable cure will be created to counter this nation-crippling cancer.
Current 'State of the Cancer'
With Obama's increased taxes on small businesses, on health care, and with the help of other creative tax schemes the Democrats are coming up with, it all amounts to wealth taken from the productive economy to pay for government expansion. There is less money is available for investments and private consumption. This means unemployment is still on the rise as smaller businesses shed jobs and are forced to work with fewer employees who are then providing less goods and services.
Government spending, dubbed Obama's stimulus, has not and will not result in a net employment increase for the simple reason that government managers cannot allocate resources as efficiently as the free market. This is by default, because the government is NOT a business and its goal is not to make a profit. Thus, Obama's continuous insistence on taxing "rich" employers and "wealthy" small businesses is causing the private sector to have less capital available to hire more workers. Government job increases will always equal zero economic growth, and private job increases will always equal increased economic growth. It's that simple.
While Roosevelt managed to retain the public's support throughout the Great Depression, despite signs that much of his New Deal didn't work, Obama's problem is that technology is allowing "we, the people" to remain more informed, retrieve information faster, and get the facts straight without the confusion of socialist propaganda getting in the way. Although, I'm sure there does exist a small percentage of unrecoverable victims of government propaganda, and they may still watch MSNBC. Thank God the U.S. taxpayers indirectly bailed out NBC through the government takeover or GE, otherwise where would these people go to watch the
The cancer is still getting worse. Rather than grow the economy, create real jobs and resolve the economic crisis, the much needed capital for investments, job growth, and opportunities for prosperity is being spent on government projects. In turn, the cancer is starving private businesses and individuals of the credit necessary to grow the economy. The growth of government as cancer continues to limit private businesses from hiring, so job losses will likely continue downward. The government is literally causing job losses everywhere by siphoning money from the economy to create jobs in government-favored segments of the private sector.
Is there a cure?
Term limits could be the most simple fix to the problems that cancer creates, such as government corruption and too much growth. Minimizing the damage being caused by America's cancer is another problem, and it requires a more complex cure. At this point, however, with a Democrat super-majority in Congress there's very little that can stop the ugly machine that is eating America's private sector and ultimately our economy.
Unless we do something to cure America of its cancer, if President Obama succeeds as he models himself after Franklin Roosevelt, the only people cheering will be left-wing partisans. If Obama's socialist agenda fails, however, the most prominent indicator that America has cured itself of cancer will be seen from dramatic increases in employment. The only real cure is to rid our government of its cancerous source; we must run out of office the Marxists, the socialists, the SEIU lobbyists, and the leftist bureaucrats who have hijacked a government system controlled by "we, the people," and taken it over by moving to a government "of the people, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats."