Yes, I am talking about the election. I suppose that the simple answer to that depends on whether you are a Democrat, a liberal or a Republican and perhaps conservative. I say simple answer because I suspect that many of the people who voted as they did were indeed voting for change, change from the current administration but not necessarily change of the kind we are now seeing from Washington. Fifty-two point nine percent of Americans voted for Mr. Obama. I do not see winning barely more than half of the votes as a mandate to change America and yet that is exactly what we are seeing, a new direction for America that appears to be taking us into a socialized democracy. A direction that abhors the accumulation of wealth as being somehow unfair, a direction that will lower the competitive American spirit, appetite for risk and the reward that comes with it, in short we are moving to an America that is not much different from the rest of the western world. That is essentially mediocre, average, mundane, ok, but nothing special. At the same time, we see the growth of China and India. It seems to me now is the time like no other in recent history for the United States to gear up what got this country to a place of world power and economic leadership, a time for innovation, risk taking, entrepreneurial spirit and not government dependency. To be sure, this is no easy task and there will be winners and losers, but the biggest winner will be the American people as a nation.
I think America made another big mistake last November and that was giving absolute power to the politicians of one party. That is never a good idea in my view. We cannot get rid of the politicians but we can provide a balance between two parties and we blew it.
We face a political view that sees the answer to budget problems in raising taxes and borrowing more as opposed to managing spending. We have uncontrolled debt, government into more and more aspects of the economy with much of this driven by pie in the sky assumptions that any reasonable person knows are guesses at best, hopefully with some education behind them. We rationalize every penny spent, just as Americans can rationalize the need for a flat screen TV or a trip to Disneyworld; hey, it only increases our monthly payment by $50.00.
We were sold a stimulus package to get us out of a recession. Much of that was necessary, but much of it was also irresponsible spending to win favor with constituents or political allies. To date the bulk of the money has merely been transferred to the states, which is the worst place to expect prudent spending. Irresponsible spending under the guise of stimulating the economy will burden future generations and may well place the United States at a competitive disadvantage in the world markets. We are a debtor nation dependent on other governments for our survival. When we find savings in one entitlement (estimated of course), we quickly spend those savings on something new rather than lower our spending and debt. The American government operates as if there is a never-ending supply of cash and credit. This is exactly the mentality that got many Americans in trouble in the last two years and yet we see no problem with our government doing the same thing. There is no fundamental difference.
We are rushing to change the environment, the health care system and who knows what else. That rush means we cannot possibly know all the consequences and it means that many of the assumptions are flawed.
The more Americans become dependent on government entitlement programs and less inclined to personal responsibility, the more average we all become. What may be intended as a safety net instead becomes the sole source of a personal need as is the case all too often with Social Security.
Government meddling in market forces always leads to unintended consequences, and yet we repeat this mistake continuously and when things go wrong, the blame is placed somewhere else. The housing and mortgage crisis are good examples.
In ten years when we look at America what will we see? Will we see a country with greatly diminished world influence, with high tax rates, with slow economic growth, with tremendous debt, with disincentives to take risk and innovate and with a population so accustomed to being provided for it demands more and more and in the process becomes satisfied with merely being one of the world crowd?
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 