I’m not an economist. I have a minor in economics, but that’s only because I needed one extra class in college. I’ve been reading about the financial “crisis” since it became headline news, and frankly, I still don’t understand why it was necessary for congress to pass a $700 billion dollar bailout. If anyone has an article about how we would have most certainly gone into a depression without it, I’d love to read it.

In the meantime, I’ve been gathering a wealth of articles to help me (and you) better understand where the problem came from and what should have been done instead of a bailout. I think you’ll also notice a theme that shows how more government involvement is not the answer, but if anything is the reason we have this mess in the first place.

Trust Capitalism – This piece makes me think the bailout wasn’t necessary, and also shows how the federal government screwed with the free market.

Democrats to Blame? – This article talks about how President Bush tried to get something done in 2003, but how Democrats blocked those efforts. Funny how we keep hearing that this is all Bush’s fault though.

Bailout Politics – A great article by Thomas Sowell about how Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd, two democrats, can be saddled with a lot of the blame. Funny how the MSM hasn’t brought this up and simply let’s Obama off the hook whenever he blames Bush.

How is Obama Connected? – Another Thomas Sowell article detailing what role Obama has had in this mess.

But despite all the facts, my faith in the general public to think intelligently about these subjects is decreasing every day. Few people think about how the government’s role in all of this matters, but instead go along with the notion that the sky is falling, it’s all President Bush’s fault, and the only one that can save mankind is Barack Obama. That sounds like a best selling novel!

We’ve had discussions about abortion in the past. I’ve heard fellow Christians say that the government shouldn’t stop people from aborting their babies. I challenge any of you who are supporting Barack Obama to read the following article, and then explain to me how your doing so can possibly coexist with your Christian faith. I’ve heard Trent try and defend abortion laws, and I’ve heard Mike say he doesn’t think Christians have to be Republicans, and the same goes for any other Christians supporting Obama or pro-abortion laws.

Read This Now

…and then tell me with a straight face how someone with such views has earned your support.

One of my favorite radio commentators is Larry Elder. As a black conservative he is able to share views that I can’t, and speak with an authority on Black America that I can’t. If you’re still deciding who you want to support, listen to the values Larry Elder talks about. When he talks about things like personal responsibility, that is what makes me a conservative. When he mentions Barack Obama’s plan to fix everything via government programs, that is why I am not a liberal.

It’s not taking very long for the differences between Obama and McCain to become obvious. Here’s a short list thanks to Hugh Hewitt.

Barack Obama wants to hike social security taxes, double the capital gains tax and restore the death tax to its highest levels.

Barack Obama opposes any expansion of exploration for oil even though the price you are paying at the pump is soaring and the only way to halt the rise is increased production.

Barack Obama wants to meet, without preconditions, with Ahmadinejad, Chavez and Kim Jung Il.

Barack Obama wants the U.S. to quit the field in Iraq ,imperiling the victory there that is emerging with unmistakable clarity.

But for this post I’d like to focus on the first point. Obama wants to extend the cap on your income that is subject to the social security tax. If you make a six figure income, you ever hope to, or you ever hope your children do, then you should be against these taxes. This doesn’t just effect the super rich, but a LOT of regular Americans who are already taxed too much. Not to mention the wealthy who pay a TON of social security taxes will not get that money back. It’s downright stealing from the rich to give to the poor, and Obama is perfectly OK with “fairness.”

First let me say that this has been a very hard post to write. It’s taken me several days of putting my thoughts in order and looking up data, but hopefully you will find it interesting. This is a post that could have gone on forever with statistics and examples, but I’ve tried to pick the biggest points I can. If you look at some of the links you might have to scroll down to find the data I’m citing.

Barack Obama has made it the central theme of his campaign that he will bring the “change” that this country needs. Currently one of the most talked about problems with our country is our “economic woes.” I thought I’d visit Barack Obama’s website to see what he had to say about poverty in America. The first thing that caught my attention was that the list went on and on. By my quick count, I see 10 programs that Obama wants to either start or expand that would require government money, not to mention several that would hurt businesses like higher minimum wage and mandatory paid sick leave. Even for mom and pop stores that’s going to cut into their bottom line.

But all the above aside, it’s one of the first things on Obama’s list that I want to focus on in this post. On his page he says:

“Poverty Rising: There are nearly 37 million poor Americans. Most Americans living in poverty work, but still cannot afford to make ends meet.”

That must go hand in hand with the economic doldrums I keep hearing about in the media and from people on the left. Nearly 37 million are poor? That sounds like a lot of people, and Barack Obama isn’t making the number up, in fact he got it from the US Census Bureau. But how is poor being defined, and is there really more the government can do to make it better?

When Obama says 37 million people are poor, that means 37 million are below the poverty line, but does that mean these people are homeless and destitute? Not in the least. Here’s a great article detailing just what it means to be “poor” in America. You can read the whole article, but here are some of my favorites:

• Eighty-nine percent of poor families say they have enough food to eat, and only two percent say they “often” don’t have enough to eat.
• Eighty percent have air conditioning (even my parents don’t have AC).
• Sixty-two percent have cable or satellite TV (we don’t!).

When Obama laments about the situation of 37 million Americans, is that really a genuine problem? Of course there are people in need, but is this the defining issue of our time? Is there really more that the government can do to fix this problem?

Since the War on Poverty began under Lyndon B. Johnson back in the 1960′s, what has happened to the poverty rate? According to the above article, we currently spend $600 billion a year on the poor, and with those kinds of expenditures the poverty rate must be declining rapidly, shouldn’t it? If you look at the census data though, the poverty rate (percentage of people below the poverty line) has remained essentially unchanged since the 1960′s! Despite all the money spent over last 40 years the government has been unable to reduce poverty, but I’m supposed to believe that the only thing we need is more government? Of course not.

Not only are the “poor” not that poor, and the government ineffective in helping them, why do so many people think our country is headed in the wrong direction and needs “change”? In fact, 87% of people think the economic condition of our country is getting worse. That’s an overwhelmingly negative outlook and it makes sense that a lot of people agree with Obama’s sentiments. But when people are asked about their own lives they give a very different response. When asked about their own personal financial situation, 76% say they are doing better or the same, and only 24% say it’s getting worse. Why the huge disconnect? For the most part people recognize their own life is OK, but then they turn around and think the country is in shambles.

All of this begs the question: Do we really need the “change” that Obama wants to bring? Are government programs and less personal responsibility the answer to a problem that isn’t near as bad as people think?

Personally I believe Obama is peddling the same failed liberal policies of the past. There is nothing new or revolutionary about his ideas. Increased governmental influence in our lives is not the key to making America better. I found this quote from President Franklin Roosevelt which I think makes for a great close to this post.

“The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit….”