« July 2008 | Main | September 2008 »
Obamanomics
Reading the nytimes piece, I'm still baffled. When you read how obama will cut taxes for middle class and poorer families it sounds great. But the author doesn't ever question the concept of 'paying for tax cuts' with a program that obama acknowledges may never raise govt revenue.
The author points out that the disparity between rich and poor is greater than 30 yrs ago. There seems to be an implied and unspoken argument that this gap is at the expense of poor people.
Are we saying that if a class of people can earn more money we are against it even if it doesn't hurt the other classes? Why isn't this communism? Make sure everyone is equally poor.
Is there any example in history of successful wealth 'redistribution'? It feels like its vogue for rich people to come out in favor of higher taxes, the ultimate sign that you are a true american. What happened to sacrifice for shared goals? Are we really saying sacrifice so everyone feels better even if it never helps them live better?
I feel like we are in the middle of an ayn rand novel.
What bothers me most about articles like this, is the assumption that the govt can effect the economy. Are we really giving clinton the credit for the 90's boom? That's like crediting roosevelt for the car.
the 90's was about productivity gains from IT and internet. This caused massive high value job creation as well as american wealth creation. The deficit was wiped out under clinton because of huge tax revenue. Nothing to do with tax cuts or raises or who was secy of treasury or even alan greenspan.
The author laments how avg americans haven't seen their std of living go up in the past decade. Well, its not a god given right. It comes from innovation and its pretty tough to exceed the prior decade.
And the idea that warren buffet is a big proponent of wealth redistribution is just weird, 'tax the heck out of people at the end and just redistribute it'. Where did that come from?
I'm impatiently waiting for our leaders and the reporters covering them to engage in a useful dialog. What is their vision for america in 20 yrs and what policies today will enable that. So far it sounds like obama's is more about wealth equality than the economic growth for many.
August 24, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (4)
Deciding the election
I'm amazed how many friends remain truly undecided. This election stands to be the closest ever.
My take, either candidate can win by appealing to the center. Seems painfully obvious.
Obama could take this hands down if he backed off the socialist 'make the rich pay' talk. As stated, he could get support for raising taxes if he made a logical argument supported by great economists. My sense is that people want to vote for him but he's too risky with all the rhetoric.
Mccain seems to be pulling ahead in my friend polls. The theory is when both options scare you go with the safe economic bet. Mccain's rhetoric is more libertarian - reduce govt spending - and that always grabs the center. If mccain can stick to this and lose the crazy old white guy who wants to go to war image, he will win.
Why can't this ever be easy? I'd love to hire the young guy and shake it up, but he speaks with such old rhetoric.
And I don't know about all of you, but it really bugs me to see friends and family drinking the obama coolaid. They get so emotional it seems like they have stopped listening and questioning. They just want to win. One family member yelled at me for challenging obama rhetoric and said if I haven't read his policy papers I shouldn't comment. This election will be decided by the sound bites, not white papers.
And where is the dialog? I would have expected obama's campaign to emulate dean and enable the many to create a movement. I haven't seen signs of the people influencing obama yet.
August 24, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0)
sonia on who deserves the tech vote
i'm reposting a story from my friend sonia arrison. i've recently gotten a bit involved in the obama campaign (mainly giving some money) in the hope that i could move the campaign in some small way toward a more centrist/clinton like place where he can serve and lead the majority of americans. sonia makes some good points about how obama still espouses a lot of old school Democratic policies that sound very lyndon johnson (guns and butter).
like all US presidential elections, we are faced with hard choices we'd rather not make. i like the persona of obama but am scared by his policies, rhetoric and lack of leadership. i am scared by mccain's persona (seems like a stubborn old man) but find his policies more supportive of a stronger economy left alone from a dumb, meddling govt. i am a libertarian so his hands off rhetoric is more appealing.
obama has said this isnt about a single person. if he lives up to that, maybe he can be moved by smart advisors - a la reagan.
Who Deserves the Tech Vote?
By Sonia Arrison
TechNewsWorld
Which presumptive major party candidate for
U.S.
president is likely to be friendlier to the tech sector? TechNewsWorld columnist Sonia Arrison examines the views of John McCain and Barack Obama on several important tech issues.
Nine months after Barack Obama, John McCain has unveiled his own technology plan for
America
. At last, both candidates can be graded for their long-term friendliness to the tech sector.
Lost beneath the theatrics of Obama's pledge to announce his VP choice via text messaging and McCain's successful YouTube
John McCain focuses on "a broad and cohesive vision for the future of American innovation" whereas Barack Obama wants to be the "generation that reshapes our economy to compete in the digital age."
So, we have one candidate who wants to promote innovation and another who wants to change the way the economy looks. These two openers say a lot about each candidate's worldview and help frame their positions on more specific issues.
Net Neutrality, Antitrust, Capital Gains
On Net neutrality, Obama argues that government should regulate how networks manage their pipes. That would certainly be a change, but it would subject the Internet to one-size-fits-all management techniques.
McCain, in contrast, opposes regulations that place restrictions on what broadband companies do with their property, which would lead to increased innovation due to increased flexibility.
On the issue of antitrust activity, which has drained countless hours and resources away from technology innovation and toward legal fees, Obama plans to increase bureaucratic attention and "reinvigorate enforcement." This would also be a change of pace -- a misplaced reallocation of resources from innovation to bureaucracy.
McCain does not mention the antitrust issue in his plan, but rather focuses on how startup companies get investment capital. To increase investment in the sector, McCain plans to keep capital gains taxes at 15 percent, which should bolster innovation.
Obama, with a focus that clearly lacks an understanding of how companies grow, plans to increase capital gains taxes to between 20 percent and 28 percent. That would be another unwelcome change for tech health.
Internet Tax, Piracy, Broadband
Obama's inclination to increase taxes may have further detrimental effects down the road as the Internet tax issue is not yet put to bed.
Those of us who have been following technology policy know that, beginning in 1998, McCain fought for a permanent ban on multiple or discriminatory state and local taxes on Internet access and e-commerce
Obama, on the other hand, would probably be willing to sign legislation that state governments require to start charging sales taxes on Internet commerce.
On piracy, McCain is clear that he "supports efforts to crack down on piracy, both on the Internet and off."
Obama is not so clear. While he says he "will work to ensure intellectual property is protected in foreign markets" he also says, as Declan McCullagh has noted, "we need to update and reform our copyright system." Does Obama think that domestic protections for intellectual property have to change, given new technologies? That would seem to be the case and is consistent with his opening statement.
On broadband, both candidates talk about the necessity of getting more Americans online, but both stumble by offering recycled ideas for getting there. Obama recycles the worst idea, subjecting broadband to the failed policy of universal service: a corrupt and wasteful government plan meant to guarantee affordable telecommunications access, which instead wound up wasting millions of taxpayer dollars.
According to Vince Vasquez, senior policy analyst at the San Diego Institute for Policy Research, "a 2005 congressional investigation found that program bureaucrats approved a 'plainly fraudulent application' for more than (US)$48 million in E-Rate subsidies for the
San Francisco
Unified
School District
."
McCain's ideas are not much better, as he suggests getting local governments into the business of providing broadband. That idea has failed in multiple jurisdictions for the obvious reason that politicians do not make good network
H-1B Visas, Transparency
On labor, the tech sector has been begging for more work visas, given that
America
is not producing enough home-grown experts. McCain says he will "expand the number of H-1B visas." Such a policy would increase human capital and spur growth and innovation.
Obama has not made such a commitment and instead says he would "support pilot programs that provide incentives for businesses to grow their information technology workforce in inner-cities and rural communities." Such a change might help, but would be slower and less effective than hiring capable people immediately. Obama also offers to "allow immigrants who earn their degrees in the
U.S.
to stay, work, and become Americans over time."
Finally, there is the issue of transparency in government, the only tech area where Obama outshines McCain. He pledges to require "executive branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can watch a live feed on the Internet" and to enable citizens to "easily track online federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials." That would be a change in the right direction.
McCain says that government "can better serve the American people by operating more efficiently through the use of technology, including videoconferencing and collaborative networks." His use of "can" rather than "will" makes his statement seem noncommittal.
McCain's greatest weakness is the transparency issue, but overall he looks better positioned than Obama on issues that matter most to innovators in the tech community.
Obama, on the other hand, has multiple weaknesses, particularly when it comes to taxes, property rights, labor and government waste that harms
America
's tech sector.
August 22, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0)
Meeting Obama
steve jurvetson was nice enough to post a photo of me and ali meeting obama, which valleywag was nice enough to then repost.
as i said, obama could be a great leader. it's my hope that his rhetoric will change to uniting people around a common vision. raise taxes if you believe that's necessary to pay down debt and support the dollar, not to 'make the rich pay their fair share'. rationalize healthcare. dont 'go after the drug and insurance companies'.
August 19, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (1)
Obama - great delivery. Where's the content?
I like obama. He has the potential to be a great leader. He has the potential like reagan to communicate to many people. But he needs to be a ceo with a clear vision, not a politician.
Most importantly, obama needs content. This was the second time I've heard him in 18 months. Same lack of a message.
Obama talks about 'just taxation' and 'making the rich pay'. This is not the american dream. Americans want to be rich. They look up to donald trump. Their favorite game show is 'who wants to be a millionaire'.
He needs to be a good ceo. Lay out clear goals. Identify the problems. Lead from a positive place. Help people find their power.
Don't campaign about what we don't want. Don't defend against mccain attacks on experience.
Lay out a vision that people can touch. Rally them around it.
Don't spend your air time complaigning. Sounds like the guys he's attacking.
Tell us what america could be like in 2020. How about 'america 2020 - bringing vision into focus'.
Don't lead with raising taxes and making the system more just. Talk about the economic path to 2020, getting out of debt, supporting the dollar, killing inflation.
Don't talk about fighting the drug and insurance companies. Tall about how we create a better life together. Don't alienate big business. Bring them with you.
Talk about how we need to invest. Invest in and enable the american dream here and abroad.
Don't talk about 'the other side'. Lead. Don't be a politician. Be a ceo.
He does talk a little about the good stuff. Where we could be in 2020.
Don't sound like a lyndon johnson tax and spender. Talk about goals worth sacrificing for.
This guy has the potential to speak to the american people, but imho still needs the right message.
August 17, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (3)
Tomstock III
sending a world shout out from tom cole. He's sorry for the blurry pic, but if you knew tom that makes sense too:)
August 12, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0)
