The Growth of Poverty

It has been a common trend for American’s in recent years to blame the Bush administration for the poor state of the economy, regardless of their party affiliation.  However, there has been a change in such thinking for many Republicans, a shift that TexasFred’s blog recently elaborated upon quite well.

            TexasFred begins his post with an excerpt from The Associated Press about how the current level of poverty is only expected to get worse, and is in fact on track to rise to the highest levels since the 1960’s. So there’s the punch line, but where’s Fred’s conservative spin? That comes next, when he asks spitefully that hadn’t Obama promised to “turn the economy around and repair all the damage done under the EVIL Bush administration?” However that’s not to say Fred gives Obama full responsibility, for he goes on to recognize that Bush by all means “bears much of the blame for our current financial difficulties”. Yet, Fred unlike most democrats does in fact give Obama some blame, for he has “been in office almost four years” which makes him at least partly accountable. He then goes on to give the “incredible amount of deficit spending” Obama initiated, which yielded poor results as evidence that Obama has in fact contributed to America’s economic downturn.

Even for a first time reader of Fred’s blog, it should be easily recognized that he has a rightward leaning stance. Thus it is no surprise that this post—and many of his past ones, are intended for at the very least moderate republicans. And in this case, his Republican favored views are evident when he spells out that Obama and the majority of democrats are wrong in their mindset that only Bush is still to blame for the economy.

Yet in this article Fred appeals to more than just Republicans, for he also makes his post appeal to the elderly. Which he does by recounting his own economic distress and how he, as well as other older Americans managed to turn their tough times around. This elderly success is thus used as evidence in convicting the “able-bodied youngsters” who elected Obama of failing to turn their own finances around despite the fact that they are more capable.

In wrapping up the post, Fred offers some food for thought when he questions Obama’s “supporters [who] are living off the sweat of someone else’s brow” how their “Hope and Change BS” will work when their “public welfare benefits [are] coming to a close as” Obama bankrupts America.  Fred then goes on to offer a solution to the distressed economy, which is replace Obama with someone who is “a business man that has held REAL jobs, hired REAL people, run successful businesses and knows how to make money”.  Which is the logic for Fred’s final thoughts-- that Americans should “give Mitt Romney a chance”, for Obama’s “Hope and Change” were just failed promises.

In the end, I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly with Fred's points--for the solution to fixing our economy lies not in the expansion of taxes and social welfare, but in the promotion of business and free trade. However, I by no means think Mitt Romney is the perfect candidate, but I do believe he would be able to solve our economic woes more than sufficiently.