& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

GLOBAL PERSPECTIVES

America decides 2012: It's not only the economy, stupid

Some, actually frighteningly many, believe that just after 4 years, electing another candidate as president will somehow miraculously cure the diseases within the US economy and society as a whole and there will be a boom and prosperity once again.

Sabria Chowdhury
THE re-election of President Barack Obama in the 2012 elections depends largely on the state of the economy. In fact, it may depend solely on the state of the economy. There is so much rhetoric, arguments and mostly criticism of Obama's handling of job creation and the economy and speculations that he can definitely not be reelected under such gloomy economic conditions.
It is truly startling to read and hear these commentaries. Are peoples' memories just short-lived or are they just not wanting to see the truth? Do they just need someone to blame? Some, actually frighteningly many, believe that just after 4 years, electing another candidate as president will somehow miraculously cure the diseases within the US economy and society as a whole and there will be a boom and prosperity once again.
My take on this entire situation deals with foundations of US policies to begin with. The root causes, I am sorry to say, do not begin or end with President Obama. I for one have a different point of view to the definitions of "boom" and "prosperity."
Did what ails the US economy today begin with Obama? Many have blamed some of the residues of President Clinton's terms in office. We can go further back. In fact, why don't we go much further back to the time of the first US President, George Washington, to search for the root causes?!
Actually, there is no need to look much further than the last US President, G.W. Bush and the colossal mess he left behind. While he and his high powered group of friends vacationed at the taxpayers' expense, the economy due to his complete lack of governance and his inept administration soured largely. The Bush administration is infamous for the disasters it inflicted on the American people: the two wars he embarked upon, the record high deficits and debt, the utter neglect of healthcare, education, energy, environment and infrastructure. It would be a plain and simple lie to ignore the fact, as many are doing now, that President Obama inherited these disasters. Furthermore, he assumed office in January of 2008. In just three and a half years, it is simply illogical and unfair that he is being judged as a president who could not achieve anything.
Obama's biggest critics from the opposing Republican Party have never been heard to take any ownership for the crisis on the many fronts which the US is faced with today. How convenient!
The Republican standpoint that taxes should not be increased, government spending should decrease, the emphasis on less government regulations is a thing of the past. We have seen that it doesn't work. Republican President Reagan's "trickle down economy" and the concept that tax breaks and other economic benefits to the wealthy, whether it be individuals or corporations, will eventually reach the members of society is truly not a viable system. Besides, even during the Reagan administration, the national debt was close to $3 trillion. I find it very difficult to conceive how this concept and practice could survive successfully and benefit the US on a permanent basis.
In a society where, unlike any other industrialised country in the world, there is continual opposition to any proposal for something so fundamental as universal health care, it is difficult to comprehend how this "trickle down” philosophy can function in any form.
Presidents Clinton and Obama's proposals for universal health care were shot down vehementiy by the Republican opposition — fearing among other things that this was a Socialist, perhaps even a Communist ploy! God forbid, the haves pay higher taxes, contribute and help the have-nots! How then can a "trickle down economy function?" Did the scholars who helped devise such an economic travesty forget somehow that human nature is such that extreme wealth and tax breaks and benefits on top of that will only create greed? That is precisely what occurred in the banking crisis in 2008 due to complete de-regulation and greed on the part of the banking sector. Complete de-regulation does not work.
The result is that millions of people are now left homeless, their homes foreclosed, with growing health problems, no health care and no apparent hopes for a better future. What is the opposition
party's most obvious trick in such times? Blame it on the current head of state because we have to blame someone and we certainly will not take any ownership for the current state of affairs!
President Obama is not the Messiah. He sure enough did not create this mess and is trying his utmost best to fix it, but cannot even attempt to reach his goals with no cooperation from the Republican Party and the Independents, who invariably knock down every proposition, every bill issued by the president and the Democratic Party. The system of checks and balances involved in investing in disastrous wars seems to have eluded the opposition. It has absolutely nothing to do with patriotism. It is about opposing, pure and simple.
Add to it all this talk about the new presidential candidates and their religious beliefs (as the US media is currentiy focusing on Mitt Romney) and we have a larger mess on our hands. Deviating from the real issues and focusing on non-issues and simply the creation of wealth is exactly what has largely contributed to the US economical demise to begin with. It is often forgotten, very sadly and mistakenly, that in order for a society, an economy to be healthy, a society must be looked at as a big picture, as one family.
In this regard, the American paranoia of paying higher taxes is inconceivable. It is actually seen as a diminishment of wealth rather than as the establishment of a system whereby the higher taxes fund health care for everyone, better education, better crime control, etc., where the "trickling down" is of a social nature. As a society, we must contribute to help everyone as a whole. This model works and is highly successfully in Western Europe, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Why should it fail in the United States, if given a chance?
The essential point here is that the United States cannot stand tall as a superpower divided against itself. Petty accusations and deviations from the real issues and bi-partisan wars are far from being constructive. There is no doubt that the Democrats and Republicans can achieve a great deal if they work constructively together. In the meantime, it would really be useful for a prosperous future for the US to look at the core issues rather than simply blame the White House and concentrate on the economy.
Will the US learn from its mistakes, create a system of financial regulations, create a social safety net for the less fortunate and not invest in costly, disastrous wars, or will history repeat itself? I am wary of the answer.
The writer is Senior Editorial Assistant, The Daily Star. E-mail: scballand@thedailystar.net