I wish Obama were more like FDR

by on March 27, 2009 at 1:59 pm in Current Affairs | Permalink

Only in this respect.

1 Matthew March 27, 2009 at 2:30 pm

You can see that Obama is a disaster for the country already, can’t you? The Democrat spending plan is an utter catastrophe. And then the horrific never-ending series of bailouts that Republicans in congress voted against, before being voted out of office.

2 josh March 27, 2009 at 2:53 pm

I bet Obama secretly supports everything that I do.

3 Matthew March 27, 2009 at 3:24 pm

Phil,

Obama / Pelosi plan: Let’s see — we are drowning in a sea of debt, so let’s create a bunch more of it. “Hair of the dog” and all that.

There is, of course, no real way through except the destruction of the absurd excesses of debt and ponzi bubble
asset prices being cut in half or more.

4 FosterBoondoggle March 27, 2009 at 3:38 pm

@Matthew – Umm…, yeah. ‘Cause the Bushies left us with a surplus, and this years 1 trillion deficit is all Obama’s doing since January 20th.

5 Gabe March 27, 2009 at 3:54 pm

Some of you guys seem really blind to to political realities.

“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.”

– Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

If you believe the democrats and the republicans represent two
opposing forces then you pretty naive.

6 athelas March 27, 2009 at 4:40 pm

I would be totally for legalization – IF we then made drug users responsible for their behavior. If you end up poor and without a job, that’s too bad, and will be an example pour encourager les autres. But in fact people are too kindhearted for this to ever work. So what we will end up having is a welfare-like redistribution of wealth towards drug users, and since that safety net is not going to change, I oppose legalization.

7 songar March 27, 2009 at 5:07 pm

“how would smokers be any less responsible for their marijuana consumption than drinkers are responsible for their alcohol consumption?”

or cigarette smokers for inhaling or motorcyclists who ride sans helmets. . . that redistribution of wealth through insurance companies

8 michael webster March 27, 2009 at 5:34 pm

Alex;

Good call.

Why Americans allowed Canadians to get rich bootlegging booze is beyond me. But at least we were civilized enough to trade with you after we pocketed our racketeering profits, sell oil, divert water, and such.

Why Americans continue to allow Columbian peasants to get rich bootlegging dope is more than beyond me. Just exactly how much non black market trade did the US do with Columbia last year?

9 floccina March 27, 2009 at 6:09 pm

No one that I know support the war on drugs. So who is it who supports that War on drugs. BTW I go to a fundamentalist church and I know many members who are against the War on Drugs.

So who is it who supports it? Is it woman who support it?

10 James March 27, 2009 at 7:41 pm

Im still stupefied that people can argue that we should have let the entire financial system collapse (which would have resulted if the large banks had gone under). Continuing the bailout does nothing politically to help Obama. His populist base is upset and Wallstreet is an ungrateful bunch who are all in favor of government intervention so long as it is only direct cash infusions. Obama is being the grown up in the room while other throw rocks in a glass house.

Oh, I really hope he legalizes marijuana (and all drugs). There is my libertarian side.

11 mravery March 27, 2009 at 10:00 pm

I like nick’s argument above: “Prohibition rarely works, so we need it now more than ever!”

Riiiight.

12 Celery Stew March 27, 2009 at 11:58 pm

America is becoming Libertarian… not because Libertarianism is really catching on as a political ideology, people are more totalitarian than ever… but because your caring socialist government is bankrupting itself to oblivion in order to get elected for another four years.

Good luck trying to run a socialist welfare state and global military superpower when you are broke and no one will lend you money anymore.

Weed will become defacto legalized when the government can no longer afford to pay its drug warriors.

13 Happy Camper March 28, 2009 at 12:13 am

Your “por favor” post was so wrong on so many levels.

So, you know economics and that allows you to dictate rules on any issue.

HC

14 mulp March 28, 2009 at 2:21 am

When the Columbian drug wars now moved to Mexico move into the Red States and Republicans start calling for decriminalizing drugs, then I’m sure that Obama will be happy to sign the Republican Party’s legislation.

The Blaine Act which became the 21st Amendment was introduced by John J. Blaine, a Republican.

One must remember that both Nixon and Reagan were major proponents of using drug laws as a means of attacking liberals, Democrats, et al and appeal to conservatives. And the Bush administration was going after all those using medical pot with prescriptions, a practice that the Obama administration ended immediately.

What I find interesting is the determination with which conservatives call for getting the government out of their lives and then in the next breath call for more war on drugs with no knock SWAT teams who are rewarded with confiscated property that the owner needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn’t the fruit of drug dealing. And no amount of economic reasoning about the high cost with little benefit of the drug laws and the harsh drug policies. It isn’t that conservatives don’t use and deal drugs as much if not more than liberals, but this is an appealing self righteous attack on liberals.

And as the comments above indicate, conservatives are looking for every reason to attack Obama as if conservatives have somehow been better than liberals at economic policy. If Obama were to advocate ending the drug prohibitions, the attacks on radio, TV, and web would be vicious, claiming that Obama is seeking to destroy America by getting them addicted to pot so they everyone would go crazy and start murdering people in their sleep.

Call for McConnell to introduce a bill ending the prohibitions on pot if you want some progress toward sanity.

15 Billare March 28, 2009 at 5:58 am

Everyone remembers that it was largely the urban black community that called for the stringent policing of the crack cocaine in the’80s, not the “enlightened” elite, right? At least while right-wing Contras were thought to be in charge of the distribution network. After that, of course, disparate sentencing lengths became racist policy.

Until upright citizen Joe Q. Sixpack can understand why the crazies in the government want to endanger and expose his children to drugs, reform is dead in the water.

Duh.

16 Vineet March 28, 2009 at 11:09 am

He didnt say legalising marijuana wouldnt trigger the economy…he only said its not a good strategy. There is a big difference there!
Did Alex Tabarrok even read obama’s statement?! same question to the suthor of the article.

Even countries like netherland where it is legal are rethinking as they have found it has a very negative impact on the youth of the country…which in turn will affect the economy in the long run. I feel Obama is right on this point.

17 anon March 28, 2009 at 1:24 pm

Let companies go bankrupt? Yeah, that would’ve worked.

Right. So we’re bankrupting the country and saddling the next few generations with debt instead. Because they can’t vote.

Yeah, that’s the ticket.

And there’s not much difference between Ds and Rs once they’re elected.

Vote L.

18 torris187 March 28, 2009 at 6:02 pm

“I’ve heard that with every additional $1 of tax on smokes 1 million fewer people smoke, they actually quite or find a substitute. If that’s true, there’s drug control.”

That’s not entirely true, many people have quasi-linear preferences when it comes to addicting substances. Or in plain English, that one dollar increase does very little to a person’s smoking comsumption due to addiction.

19 Alan Brown March 30, 2009 at 11:31 pm

This is a sovereignty issue.

If you can’t even decide what happens with your own body, how free are you?

Not very.

Its not a question if its right to put pot in your body or remove a baby before it is ready. I would argue both are immoral.

The question is whether I have the right to dictate what happens in the territory that is your body. I do not. What happens there is up to you.

20 sex shop August 4, 2010 at 7:09 am

And Matthew: remind me the Republican’s genius plan for getting us out of this economic mess? Let companies go bankrupt? Yeah, that would’ve worked

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: