Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: The Real State of the Union - Stossel Style

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,601
    Post Thanks / Like

    The Real State of the Union - Stossel Style

    The Real State of the Union
    By John Stossel
    Has Barack Obama learned nothing in three years? Last night, during his State of the Union address, he promised "a blueprint for an economy." But economies are crushed by blueprints. An economy is really nothing more than people participating in an unfathomably complex spontaneous network of exchanges aimed at improving their material circumstances. It can't even be diagrammed, much less planned. And any attempt at it will come to grief.

    Politicians like Obama believe they are the best judges of how we should conduct our lives. Of course a word like "blueprint" would occur to the president. He, like most who want his job, aspires to be the architect of a new society.



    But we who love our lives and our freedom say: No, thanks. We need no social architect. We need liberty under law. That's it.

    Obama -- and most Republicans are no different -- doesn't understand the real liberal revolution that transformed civilization. The crux of that revolution is that law should define general visible rules of just conduct, applicable to all, with no eye to particular outcomes. In other words, as Nobel laureate F.A. Hayek taught, the only "purpose" of law is to enable us all to pursue our individual purposes in peace.

    If Obama really wanted, as he says, a society in which "everybody gets a fair shot," he would work to shrink government so that the sphere of freedom could expand. Instead, he expands government and raises taxes on wealthier people, as though giving politicians more money were a way to make society better. Instead, the interventionist state rigs the game on behalf of special interests.

    What should Obama have said in his speech? Here's what I wish he'd said:

    Our debt has passed $15 trillion. It will reach Greek levels in just 10 years.

    But if we make reasonable cuts to what government spends, our economy can grow us out of our debt. Cutting doesn't just make economic sense, it is also the moral thing to do. Government is best which governs least.

    We'll start by closing the Department of Education, which saves $100 billion a year. It's insane to take money from states only to launder it through Washington and then return it to states.

    Next, we'll close the Department of Housing and Urban Development. That saves $41 billion. We had plenty of housing in America before a department was created.

    Then we eliminate the Commerce Department: $9 billion. A government that can't count votes accurately should not try to negotiate trade. We will eliminate all corporate welfare and all subsidies. That means agriculture subsidies, green energy subsidies, ethanol subsidies and so on. None of it is needed.

    I propose selling Amtrak. Why is government in the transportation business? Let private companies compete to run the trains.

    And we must finally stop one of the biggest assaults on freedom and our pocketbook: the war on drugs. I used drugs. It's immoral to imprison people who do what I did and now laugh about.

    Still, all these cuts combined will only dent our deficit. We must cut Medicare, Social Security and the military.

    I know. Medicare and Social Security are popular. But they are unsustainable. The only way to cut costs and still have medical innovation is to free the market. So I propose that we repeal Obamacare immediately. My proposal was a mistake. We should repeal all government interference in the medical and insurance industries, including licensing. It all impedes competition.

    We must shrink the military's mission to true national defense. That means pulling our troops out of Germany, Japan, Italy and dozens of other countries. America cannot and should not try to police the world.

    Those cuts will put America on the road to solvency. But that's not enough. We also need economic growth.

    Our growth has stalled because millions of pages of regulations make businesses too fearful to invest. Entrepreneurs don't know what the rules -- or taxes -- will be tomorrow.

    All destructive laws must go. I endorse the Stossel Rule: For every new law passed, we must repeal two old ones.

    OK, Obama will never say that.

    But I can dream, can't I?

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,379
    Post Thanks / Like
    Stossel.

    [IMG]http://funnyphotosto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/22/Crying-252BBaby-252BNatural-252BHigh-252Bfor-252BSome-252BMoms.jpg[/IMG]

    You guys had 8 years. All you did was slow jerk yourselves until you had blisters. And then somehow figured out how to have a decorated war vet lose to a Muslim during a time of war.

    "I propose selling Amtrak".

    Now?

    Why didn't your stupid, porn mustached self "propose" that, ummm....I dunno....6 years ago?


    Because you're an idiot. That's why.


    [QUOTE]For every new law passed, we must repeal two old ones.[/QUOTE]

    But you sat silently by while your party's leader grew the government faster than Sheik Bin Obama-nasser, huh?

    [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSTEqHxh3fI[/url]

    You're a great big phony....
    Last edited by PlumberKhan; 01-27-2012 at 05:31 PM.

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Miss him on 20/20.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4349850]You guys had 8 years. All you did was slow jerk yourselves until you had blisters. And then somehow figured out how to have a decorated war vet lose to a Muslim during a time of war.

    "I propose selling Amtrak".

    Now?[/QUOTE]
    lol

    May i remind you (because you clearly need reminding) that Obama came to office with solid House and Senate majorities.

    He lost the House decisively 2 years later - because he sucks, not because he's a Muslim.

    The economy has not improved since 2010, in fact, it's working against him. Our last GDP number (2.8%) which the liberal press is trying to call impressive growth is actually an anemic number from which to recover from recession.

    We're mired in a sluggish economy where a lot more can go wrong than right and it's all on Obama.

    Anyone who thinks the presidential race will be popularity contest when gas costs $5 a gallon this summer is in for quite a shock.

    You can run from the fact that Obama sucks, but you can't hide from it.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,543
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4349850]Stossel.

    [B]You guys had 8 years[/B]. All you did was slow jerk yourselves until you had blisters. And then somehow figured out how to have a decorated war vet lose to a Muslim during a time of war.

    "I propose selling Amtrak".

    Now?

    Why didn't your stupid, porn mustached self "propose" that, ummm....I dunno....6 years ago?

    Because you're an idiot. That's why.

    But you sat silently by while [B]your party'[/B]s leader grew the government faster than Sheik Bin Obama-nasser, huh?

    You're a great big phony....[/QUOTE]

    This rant might carry a little more weight if Stossel were actually a Republican :rolleyes:

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4350761]This rant might carry a little more weight if Stossel were actually a Republican :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    Yes he's a Libertarian, which means he's a professional second guesser and will never have any power.

  7. #7
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    Holy sh*t, you hate Obama? :zzz:

    [QUOTE=sackdance;4350595]lol

    May i remind you (because you clearly need reminding) that Obama came to office with solid House and Senate majorities.

    He lost the House decisively 2 years later - because he sucks, not because he's a Muslim.

    The economy has not improved since 2010, in fact, it's working against him. Our last GDP number (2.8%) which the liberal press is trying to call impressive growth is actually an anemic number from which to recover from recession.

    We're mired in a sluggish economy where a lot more can go wrong than right and it's all on Obama.

    Anyone who thinks the presidential race will be popularity contest when gas costs $5 a gallon this summer is in for quite a shock.

    You can run from the fact that Obama sucks, but you can't hide from it.[/QUOTE]

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,856
    Post Thanks / Like
    If we let these politicians run this like it has been for decades now. We seeing the end of America. We are not being destroyed from without we are being destroyed by the cancer within!

  9. #9
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4350853]Yes he's a Libertarian, which means he's a professional second guesser and will never have any power.[/QUOTE]

    Correction, the proper response is "yes he's a Libertarian which places him squarely in the center of the country and he can voice his true common sense ideas without the constraints of traditional conservatism of liberalism".

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4349850]Stossel.

    [IMG]http://funnyphotosto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/22/Crying-252BBaby-252BNatural-252BHigh-252Bfor-252BSome-252BMoms.jpg[/IMG]

    You guys had 8 years. All you did was slow jerk yourselves until you had blisters. And then somehow figured out how to have a decorated war vet lose to a Muslim during a time of war.

    "I propose selling Amtrak".

    Now?

    Why didn't your stupid, porn mustached self "propose" that, ummm....I dunno....6 years ago?


    Because you're an idiot. That's why.




    But you sat silently by while your party's leader grew the government faster than Sheik Bin Obama-nasser, huh?

    You're a great big phony....[/QUOTE]

    So because you didn't hear or read Stossel's take before Obama you feel he wasn't against big government with Bush but he was. As can be seen in the link below with articles from 2006 and from his book. He also says on almost every show how he realized that he was wrong about a lot of stuff in his early career. He is a Libertarian not a Republican.

    Here is an article complaining about Republicans as much as Democrats during the 2008 elections. [URL]http://www.creators.com/opinion/john-stossel/what-happened-to-market-discipline.html[/URL]

    [QUOTE]John McCain says, "We are going to fight the greed and irresponsibility on Wall Street. These actions [leading to crisis] stem from failed regulation, reckless management and a casino culture on Wall Street. ... We need strong and effective regulation ... " ([URL]http://tinyurl.com/3t7qvh[/URL]).


    He proposes a new bureaucracy, the Mortgage and [URL="http://www.creators.com/opinion/john-stossel/what-happened-to-market-discipline.html#"][COLOR=darkgreen]Financial[/COLOR][COLOR=darkgreen]Institutions[/COLOR][/URL] Trust (MFI), which he says will "provide troubled institutions with an orderly process to identify bad loans, provide funding and eventually sell them at a profit. ... The MFI will supervise the sale of loan assets at market prices and [I] purchase them as necessary [/I]" (emphasis added; [URL]http://tinyurl.com/3wcv9q[/URL]).
    A government agency is going buy bad loans and make a profit selling them.


    [CENTER][CENTER] [B][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-4][URL="http://www.intermarkets.net/adfeedback/form.htm?Plcmt=1297475&ATFlgt=958371&Ntwk=3170345&NCrt=3184106"]AD FEEDBACK[/URL][/SIZE][/FONT][/B] [/CENTER]
    [/CENTER]
    Give me a break!

    Irresponsibility induced by government-created perverse incentives is the culprit. For decades politicians of both parties have relieved big companies of the responsibility that market discipline would have imposed. The promise — explicit or implicit — to bail out companies "too big to fail" weakens market discipline. That invites recklessness.
    [/QUOTE]
    [URL]http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Stossel/[/URL]

  11. #11
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,754
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4352131]Correction, the proper response is "yes he's a Libertarian which places him squarely in the center of the country and he can voice his true common sense ideas without the constraints of traditional conservatism of liberalism".[/QUOTE]

    He's on Fox Business, it seems no one really cares about Mr. Stossel anymore or he wold be on a channel people actually watch after the market closes. :yes:

  12. #12
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    From 2007. So after reading this will you take back the nonsense posts, admit you were wrong and read his articles for what they are?


    [QUOTE]The Tax-Cut Myth


    The federal government keeps growing, as I pointed out last week, but the [B]Bush administration [/B]has cut tax rates a few times since 2001. How can that be? The answer is simple: deficit spending.


    [B]Some Republicans argue [/B]that deficits don't matter; that if you cut taxes, everything else takes care of itself. [B]But that's a myth[/B]. Yes, the tax cuts stimulated the economy and increased tax revenues. It happens because, as the Laffer Curve illustrates [[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve][/url], lower rates mean higher rewards for productive activities. People undertake investments and work that higher tax rates had discouraged. They are also less likely to invest time and energy in using accountants and tax lawyers to find ways to avoid taxes.


    [B]That's all good, but there's a downside to cutting tax rates without cutting spending.[/B] Deficit spending disguises the real burden of government. As a result, we get more than we'd want and that's not good. Government makes up the deficit either by borrowing, which removes productive resources from private hands and must be repaid by future taxes, or by creating money out of thin air inflation which steals purchasing power from us by devaluing our money.


    [B]In other words, tax cuts without spending cuts are an illusion.[/B] The burden of government has not really been lightened. As the late Milton Friedman constantly pointed out, that burden is better measured by the level of spending, not the level of taxes. [B]Shame on the Bush administration for trying to pull a fast one on the American public.[/B]


    [B]President Bush brags[/B] that the deficit is coming down and it is. It's expected to be "only" $244 billion by the time the current fiscal year ends. And the Office of Management and Budget projects a surplus in 2012. But that's largely because your FICA taxes currently exceed Social Security and Medicare payments.


    That will change in 2017 and 2019, respectively, when the baby-boomers retire en masse [[url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/23/AR2007042301963.html][/url]. After that, the Social Security and Medicare budgets begin to go south. Sharply. Avoiding devastating deficits then will take a Houdini.


    Let's give President Bush some credit for the falling deficit. Because of his tax cuts, tax revenue our hard-earned money is pouring into the government's coffers, Government spending is keeping ahead of that torrent, but at an ever-slower rate. Hence the shrinking deficit. But this is not necessarily a good thing.


    Bush boasted last year, "This economy is growing, federal taxes are rising, and we're cutting the federal deficit faster than we expected. Some in Washington say we had to choose between cutting taxes and cutting the deficit. Today's numbers show that that was a false choice. The economic growth fueled by tax relief has helped send our tax revenues soaring."


    But I don't want tax revenues to soar. That's money you and I could be spending for things we want. I want revenue and spending and government overall to shrink. So I'm not celebrating with the president. The deficit is shrinking because the government takes more and more out of the productive private sector each year.


    If revenues are pouring in, why don't the politicians return it to the taxpayers instead of spending it? Because politicians love to spend money. They get reelected not by how much they save but by how much they shower on interest groups.


    This was foreseen by anti-federalist writer Melancton Smith in 1787: "[A]ll governments find a use for as much money as they can raise."


    Things haven't changed much in 220 years.


    John Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News' "20/20" and the author of "Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity: Get Out the Shovel Why Everything You Know is Wrong," which is now out in paperback. To find out more about John Stossel and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at [url]www.creators.com[/url].


    COPYRIGHT [SIZE=5][COLOR=Red][B]2007[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE] BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.[/QUOTE]

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,379
    Post Thanks / Like
    Nope.


    He's a giant a**hole. Sorry.

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4352169]Nope.


    He's a giant a**hole. Sorry.[/QUOTE]

    Possibly but not for the reason's you stated.

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,379
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Trades;4352181]Possibly but not for the reason's you stated.[/QUOTE]

    Sure he is.

    Watch him when he talks...not what he writes. ;)

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,172
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4352188]Sure he is.

    Watch him when he talks...not what he writes. ;)[/QUOTE]

    I have never heard him excuse Rs for spending like you say. He is a solid Libertarian and I like a lot of what he has to say and I can't think of a time I felt he was lying even if I disagreed with him.

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Trades;4352206]I have never heard him excuse Rs for spending like you say. He is a solid Libertarian and I like a lot of what he has to say and I can't think of a time I felt he was lying even if I disagreed with him.[/QUOTE]

    Stossel is the pundit I agree with most often. His stuff on our messed up education system is the gold standard. Krauthammer is probably second on that list but he is more about political strategy than actual policy.

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    I just can't stand listening to him because of his cadence, he sound like Mr. Rogers. i also hate public speakers or personalities that ask questions to themselves and then answer then. And he gets all high pitched when he does it, it is distracting to me.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    13,518
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is all I'll ever remember John Stossel for:

    [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0q44ALM7jo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0q44ALM7jo[/URL]

  20. #20
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=piney;4352935]I just can't stand listening to him because of his cadence, he sound like Mr. Rogers. i also hate public speakers or personalities that ask questions to themselves and then answer then. And he gets all high pitched when he does it, it is distracting to me.[/QUOTE]

    I understand what you mean about the cadence. Its his signature style. I look at it as more of a way of speaking about complex issues in simple terms. The alternative is a guy like Krauthammer that speaks in a monotonous tone with complex wording. Smart fellow but most people would find him boring to listen to.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us