Tuesday, February 8, 2011

The President, The Chamber of Commerce, Michael Moore and Capitalism

President Obama yesterday told the U.S. Chamber of Commerce they need to work more with the government and share more with their workers.
Speaking to the Chamber on their home turf, Obama stressed that businesses owe certain responsibilities to the nation. “I understand the challenges you face. I understand you are under incredible pressure to cut costs and keep your margins up. I understand the significance of your obligations to your shareholders and the pressures that are created by quarterly reports,” Obama said. “I get it.”

“Of course, your responsibility goes beyond recognizing the need for certain standards and safeguards. If we’re fighting to reform the tax code and increase exports to help you compete, the benefits can’t just translate into greater profits and bonuses for those at the top. They should be shared by American workers, who need to know that expanding trade and opening markets will lift their standard of living as well as your bottom line.”

Some liberal organizations took exception to Obama addressing the Chamber at all. “Two weeks ago the President promised that he would work to rebuild people’s faith in government. Meeting with the biggest lobbyists in the country is hardly a step in the right direction,” said Erica Payne, the founder of The Agenda Project, a 501(c)4 that works with progressive organizations to coordinate messaging.

It seems to me Mr. Obama is clearly unqualified to be advising businesses (or their lobbyists) on how to conduct business. He has a law degree and was a community organizer, with no discernable business experience at all. Does being President automatically make you qualified in the world of business?

Mr. Obama was also praised by the main stream media as being like John F. Kennedy in this address. While Mr. Obama indicated that corporations should “ask what you can do for your country”, the truth is the current administration is completely opposite of JFK when it comes to stimulating the economy and growing jobs. In 1962, JFK addressed this issue eloquently:

“But the most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand — to cut the fetters which hold back private spending. In the past, this could be done in part by the increased use of credit and monetary tools, but our balance of payments situation today places limits on our use of those tools for expansion. It could also be done by increasing federal expenditures more rapidly than necessary, but such a course would soon demoralize both the government and our economy. If government is to retain the confidence of the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of national need or spent with maximum efficiency. And I shall say more on this in a moment.”

“The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1963.”

So in the words of JFK, tax cuts for citizens and corporations stimulate and grow the economy. President Obama didn’t even want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the people, let alone for corporations. So what part of Obama is like Mr. Kennedy?

On a lighter note, it seems capitalist hating, money loathing Michael Moore is unhappy because he feels Bob and Harvey Weinstein ripped him off for 2.7 million dollars for his movie “Fahrenheit 9/11. Mr. Moore received 19.8 million for the film (that alone must have been extremely painful for him to accept) but believes he is due another 2.7 million and is suing the Weinsteins for that difference.

I’m sure Mr. Moore only wants to collect his extra millions to give away to those who have less. After all, he’s done that with the other 19.8, right? (After a few million for operating expenses, of course.) Geez, up until now I always figured Michael Moore for a straight up, money hating, stand up for the little guy, one of us kinda man. Yeah, right.

No comments:

Post a Comment