Letter to the editor:

Bigger government not our kind of change

Joseph Hassen, North Las Vegas

Fri, Jun 27, 2008 (2:05 a.m.)

This is in response to Jim Behrendt’s Wednesday letter, in which he expressed his belief that Sen. Barack Obama will attract Republicans to vote for him.

Yes, Republicans (and Libertarians) are capitalists. We believe in capitalism because it has been the most successful way for the vast majority of people to have the greatest prosperity.

Our current president has deviated from these ideals. To think we would vote for Obama, however, because of this is laughable.

Republicans want the smaller, limited government our country was founded on. Obama is surely not going to give that to us. He will bring on only bigger, more costly government programs that do nothing but cost us taxpayers more and more of our paychecks.

Further, most of the problems Mr. Behrendt mentions, such as the plunging dollar, Social Security and immigration, are problems Congress has either caused or fueled — or refuses to take action on for fear of a voter backlash.

Obama wants to expand Social Security, which is already heading for insolvency. I am sure Republicans will see what Obama is really all about — big government — and not vote for him.

Change is the answer, but we need change that is the exact opposite of what Obama suggests.

Discussion: 2 comments so far…

By Teaser

6/27/08 at 10:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

Get real. First, capitalism works because some people get rich only at the expense of others. Period. It is a myth that anyone can get ahead. We do not have an even playing field. You think I could ever possibly attain the wealth of Bill Gates? His success came in large measure because he came from affluence (he dropped out of Harvard, for God's sake) and already had connections and access to those people and corporations that allowed him to market his software. Exactly where and how does the little guy like me find these people?

Second, we have had anything but smaller government under the current Bush/Republican regime. It was the Republicans who cashed in the Social Security funds and wrote an "IOU" in its place. By the time we reach the point where we need to collect on that promise, we will need some $52 trillion - yes, trilion - to cover it. If you paid back $1 per second on that amount of money, it would take 1.2 million years to repay it.

Contemplate that, and then tell me how this defines "small government" intrusion on our lives.
By baseballfan53

7/14/08 at 7:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Ok I've contemplated that.

Capitalism works because people are free to choose. They enter into jobs they choose for pay based on their skills. If you don't like your pay then get a better skill, you’re free to do so at any time. They then can spend this money (at least what the government doesn't steal i.e. taxes) on whatever they choose. They tend to spend it on things that are 1) good products 2) improve their lives and 3) easy to use. Sounds like Bill Gates made this product and sold a lot of it. I say good for him and us!

On the contrary government spending isn’t optional; you go to jail if you don’t pay your taxes. Seems like stealing doesn’t it!

Do some research about the "trust fund" SS is a pay-go system. http://www.heritage.org/Research/SocialS...

I couldn't agree more about social security being an intrusion in our lives, SS was intended for only the very poor when it was established, and now everyone practically gets a benefit. The responsible thing to do would make most people save for their own retirement and only the very poor get a SS handout. This would have multiple benefits for job creation (i.e. investment) and a backup savings when needed.

The whole point of my letter was that Bush has taken us in the wrong direction and Obama would only be further in the wrong direction as far as government spending goes.