Political Roundtable Pulsar of Annihilation part IV

[Nivek]

The brief searches I've done on this subject return equivocal results. I see horror stories. I also see estimates of welfare fraud at around 2% of the benefits paid. So...dunno. My guess is that the truth is something between 2% and the epidemic you're describing.

Nationwide, it looks like 13-15% of the population gets food stamps. Or, as the government calls it, "nutritional assistance." Which is an oxymoron considering the link between food stamps and obesity.

It's interesting to look at the rise in the number of people receiving food stamps. Not surprisingly, the increase in recent years coincided with the economic downturn and the rise in unemployment. The numbers haven't feathered down as unemployment has declined.

Interesting subject.

[dobrojim]

how does a feeling that large numbers of fellow citizens are not trying
so hard (gentle euphemism) comport with a campaign slogan of "Believe in America"?
Seems like a disconnect to me.

[Induveca]

Nivek, agreed it's an interesting subject....but one which speaks directly to what exactly governments would do with increased tax revenue from the "rich". The food stamp program to me has always represented how out of touch the government is with the reality of the "new" US population. The level of corruption of these systems is always "discussed" but the depths are too frightening for politicians to probe. Politicians can NEVER be seen as attacking the poor, or they are painted as out of touch/rich aristocrats.

[Induveca]

how does a feeling that large numbers of fellow citizens are not trying
so hard (gentle euphemism) comport with a campaign slogan of "Believe in America"?
Seems like a disconnect to me.

As I've stated I'm not rooting for Romney, I'm rooting against Obama. I too don't trust politics.

But anyone with a brain could obviously spin that term in 1000 ways, which is what politicians do......

"Believe in America through self-reliance and the opportunity the country affords you!"

That's just one pathetic attempt.

Or you could go the opposite way and say...

"Believe in America, we'll support you during your downtimes with food/housing/health care/no questions asked!"

I'd prefer to go with #1. Second one is too appealing for lazy types.

[pancakes3]

I feel like a lot of people are looking for holes to poke in Induveca's plan for the sake of poking holes. It does seem like welfare fraud is a very real problem in NYC. However Zonk is also correct in that the Federal government has its hands tied because it's a local problem and it can't tailor the system for a specific case. Tough cookie to crack, but very interesting. Far more than debating semantics of meaningless debates specifically designed to sway the unwashed masses - a demographic beneath the articulate and intelligent constituents of this beloved board.

[MDStar]

Just as Indu can speak on his experiences, I can also speak on mine. As a 29 year old, hard working African american, I can say without a doubt, that welfare saved my life as a kid. My father, was a drunk, addict and a abuser, while my mother did the best she could we with situation that he put her and us in. So yes, he may have tried to scam the system in many ways, but that money kept my mother, myself and my two smaller sisters from living on the streets. And there was a spell when I actually did. Not exactly the same as being "poor" in NY as I've seen described here. Once I got old enough to work and my father rolled, things started to changed but if it wasn't for those programs, only God knows where I would be right now.

So I say all of that to say, yes there are many Americans who abuse the system, I know many of them myself. However, penalizing the Americans who truly need the assistance as a way of stopping those who get over, is very short sighted and small minded.

[dobrojim]

I think a fair interpretation of "believe in America" should mean believing in large
measure in the strength and character of the widest possible swarth (within reasonable
limits) of the citizenry among other things. It's quite obvious Willard and the GOP
do not feel that way.

When Willard (my own middle name as well FWIW) says he knows how to do this
or that (create jobs, close deficit...) but never explains HOW he will do it, I don't
see why anyone should take much credence in that. He was obviously successful
as a founder of Bain, but it's pretty obvious that that success cannot possibly be
applied to the economy as a whole. It only proves that he has expertise over
a very narrow area of a type of business that many, correctly in my view, believe
perfectly exemplifies all the worst aspects of the modern (last 3 decades) American
economy. While we may wish to shop at Staples, no intelligent person would
want to work there and our economy will be in the toilet the more people
are forced to take jobs at poverty wages out of desperation. Romney can
talk all he wants about job creation but his record both in business and
as Gov of Mass is not something the country ought to aspire to.

Kevin Philips has written extensively about how when a country shifts from
an economy based ~ 30% on manufacturing and 10% on financial services to
one where those percentages are reversed, it does not bode well for the
future well being of its citizenry.

[pancakes3]

The buzz-issue of "creating jobs" is one of the most frustrating hand-wavy political platforms I've seen in my still-young political life.

1 - Jim, you pointed it out with the Staples analogy. Employment vs unemployment vs underemployment. Creating jobs is different than creating jobs that will have a positive effect on the economy which is different than creating jobs that people are qualified for which is different than creating jobs that people want. How any one person can claim a magical fix for all of those three things is beyond all mortal comprehension.

2 - We're losing jobs partially because of a cultural shift. The view that any college degree trumps any technical degree has led to a disproportionately large number of liberal arts degrees and a severe shortage of technical degrees. No president can change that. No president can even address that lest they be booed lustily off-stage. Seriously though. You have English majors slinging coffee yet Maryland's computer science grad program AND electrical engineering program combined has all of ZERO American-born grad students. The simultaneous diploma inflation and the diploma drought is slowly bleeding out the economy.

3 - Forget college degrees. Many people are jobless with legitimate degrees. I know of quite a few Environmental Thought and Practice majors because it's a "hot" topic yet with precious few jobs and yet pretty much every single graduate of a trade school for electricians and plumbers is virtually guaranteed a job and the chance to advance into a 6-figure salary if they play their cards right.

[Induveca]

Back to the Staples example.....my father used to tell me many times that "Most people aren't meant to go to college." He used to point at the guys changing tires, manning gas stations, fixing houses and just general manual labor around Santo Domingo as examples and said something to the effect of "who would do these jobs if everyone was destined to be a genius?"

I firmly believe the US has become a service economy by teachers/parents/government insisting on the need for nearly ALL high school kids to attend college. It's as if many parents have blinders on to the true potential of their kids. Vocational/Technical schools are a great option for kids who are still in Algebra 1 in 12th grade! The craziest part about it, is many of these same kids end up paying 12k a year via loans to take the exact same class, with the same results a year later in a private university.

It's a huge disservice to the kids, the community and the country as a whole to send mentally below average kids to college. Most either drop out, or stick around for 4 years being generally useless and racking up massive debt.

No need to tell a kid destined to be a great manager at a Staples that he is capable of being a scientist when everyone around him knows it's equivalent to winning the lottery. There is nothing wrong with being a solid manager at a respectable chain store, but for some reason Americans now feel even service level jobs are "beneath" them.

[Zonkerbl]

I taught at Indiana University. As average as those kids seemed to me, they were the top 20% of their class.

Believe me, not everyone is going to college.

[closg00]

Romney got his ass handed to him tonight, I wonder if there will be any movement in the polls.

[dobrojim]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/opinion/55019844-82/romney-obama-state-president.html.csp

this from some of the folks who know him best

In considering which candidate to endorse, The Salt Lake Tribune editorial board had hoped that Romney would exhibit the same talents for organization, pragmatic problem solving and inspired leadership that he displayed here more than a decade ago. Instead, we have watched him morph into a friend of the far right, then tack toward the center with breathtaking aplomb. Through a pair of presidential debates, Romney’s domestic agenda remains bereft of detail and worthy of mistrust.

Therefore, our endorsement must go to the incumbent, a competent leader who, against tough odds, has guided the country through catastrophe and set a course that, while rocky, is pointing toward a brighter day. The president has earned a second term. Romney, in whatever guise, does not deserve a first.

[nate33]

Romney got his ass handed to him tonight, I wonder if there will be any movement in the polls.

I doubt it. Romney's strategy was clearly to be non-combative and to stay above the fray. He didn't even get into the Libyan ambassador assassination.

The debate points don't matter at this juncture. The people who pay attention to the minutia have already made up their minds. The undecided are just tuning in now to get a general feel for who they like. What matters now is who looks more "presidential". Romney was trying to win that battle. I don't know if he succeeded or not. FWIW, after the debate, several pundits made the point that Romney looked like the President and Obama looked like the challenger.

[Nivek]

This whole "looks presidential" thing is maybe kinda-sorta important for the challenger. Obama already looks presidential -- he's had the job for awhile now and people are accustomed to seeing him in that role (even those who hate that he's in the role).

I agree that Obama "winning" the last two debates probably won't create a big movement in the polls. The surveys appear to have stabilized with Obama slightly ahead.

[Zonkerbl]

Wow, check this out:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/investig ... tid=rr_mod

[nate33]

The surveys appear to have stabilized with Obama slightly ahead.

Depends on which poll you look at.

According to this study, the most accurate pollsters in 2008 were as follows:

Code: Select all

Poll                     BO   JM  Off by
Rasmussen Reports        52   46   0.5 
Pew                      52   46   0.5 
GWU/Battleground         50   44   0.5 
Ipsos/McClatchy          53   46   0.5 
CNN/Opinion Research     53   46   0.5 
Fox News                 50   43   0.5 
Diageo/Hotline           50   45   1.5 
NBC News / WSJ           51   43   1.5 
Gallup Traditional       51   43   1.5 
IBD/TIPP                 52   44   1.5 
Marist                   52   43   2.5 
ABC News / Wash Post     53   44   2.5 
Gallup Expanded          52   43   2.5 
CBS News / NYT           51   42   2.5 
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby     54   43   4.5 

According to Real Clear Politics, several of these pollsters have published their most recent data. Taking the most recent data, and excluding everything prior to October, we have the following, in order of 2008 accuracy:

Rasmussen Reports - 10/15-10/22 - Romney +4
Pew - 10/4-10/7 - Romney +3
GWU/Battleground - 10/15-10/18 - Romney +2
Ipsos/McClatchy - N/A
CNN/Opinion Research - no October data
Fox News - 10/7-10/9 - Romney +1
Diageo/Hotline - N/A
NBC News / WSJ - 10/17-10/20 - Tie
Gallup Traditional - 10/15-10/21 - Romney +6
IBD/TIPP - Obama +4
Marist - N/A
ABC News / Wash Post - 10/18-10/21 - Obama +1
CBS News / NYT - 10/17-10/20 - Obama +2
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby - NA

I'd look at these numbers and say that the polls have stabilized with Romney slightly ahead, and that there is a clear trend showing that the most accurate polls of 2008 tend to favor Romney even more.

[LyricalRico]

Wow, check this out:

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/investig ... tid=rr_mod

There was another article in the Post recently about numerous homicide cases that were only partially investigated and then closed for whatever reason without the family even being told. It was absolutely amazing.

[Induveca]

Nate, I can only hope.

I have to admit, Romney got his ass kicked last night if one was expecting a battle. However if his objective was purely to appear "capable", he more than accomplished that goal. Still came away unimpressed, but prefer him due to the dividend tax issue.

Every time I hear Obama say he will "ask the wealthy to do a bit more" I **** cringe. This from a government that spends 75 dollars on lightbulbs.

If Obama implemented stringent oversight of government contract spending, welfare reform and a hike on federal sales tax along with a hike in sales tax on "luxury goods".....he could accomplish the same goal without acting like a corrupt Robin Hood.

[Nivek]

Best poll analysis I've seen comes from Nate Silver who writes the 538 blog at NY Times. He combines state and national polls in a thorough and comprehensive way and his projections were bang on in each of the past two election cycles (2008 and 2010). I started reading him in 2008 -- no idea whether he did his thing before then. According to his analysis, Obama has a 70% chance of winning. That's down from a high of 87% before the 1st debate, but up from a low of 61% on Oct. 12.

[pancakes3]

Every time I hear Obama say he will "ask the wealthy to do a bit more" I **** cringe.

Drives my dad nuts every time someone says "pay your fair share".


And as for the polls, overall I'm surprised that Romney is as close as he is. I don't know how much of this is Romney overachieving or Obama underachieving.