Obama has shown what he is very clearly when he confiscated GM from the owners and handed it over to the union labour (in fact the non-union labour was also left out to dry). He does not believe in ownership of means of production. As to him being a socialist, it is you, who must be kidding.
One pushed through a big health care reform which will cover millions of uninsured people while the other is moving as far away from his (mostly identical) program as possible.
- They are identical on this topic. First of all Romney's plan is Obama's plan. Secondly Romney is not going to cut anything from either Medicare or SS. It's not his plan.
Paul Ryan is a complete joke, total sell out, a fraud. His 'plan' makes rosy assumptions that will never come true about the interest rates and growth of economy and he never cuts anything from any budget.
Even his supposed cuts to the rate of growth of the government are nonsense, they can't start for another 10 years, that's what the point is that he is bringing across - if you are 55 or over, you will not be affected by his cuts.
But there are no cuts. No cut is a cut unless it's done in the first term of presidency, everything else is a funny game they like to play. Even the so called 'sequestration', or automatic cuts that were the deal to avoid the US rating from being cut further by the rating agencies (political beats, not real rating agencies), even this is not going to happen and this was the agreement just 1 year ago.
Why would anybody care what anybody says about any cuts 10 and more years into the future? USA doesn't have 10 years, the US dollar and bonds will be destroyed much earlier than that.
One believes that progressive taxation is essential to prosperity. The other has done everything he can to make the tax system regressive.
- ha, the ONLY difference between Romney and Obama in this is that the top earners will have the SAME CUTS as the rest of them under Romney's plan, and Obama, as the Marxist that he is, is leading the class warfare, so he is going to give tax cuts to everybody except the top 1% (that's his platform).
(As to 'believing in progressive taxation' - what a stupid idea. Progressive taxation is simply theft, nothing else, it cannot grow anything by definition, it removes the investment funding from the productive part of society and moves it to the unproductive part).
One believes we need to regulate the financial sector to ensure stability. The other has pledged to tear down what little regulation we have.
- USA has over 100,000 regulations of financial institutions in place, that's first. Secondly - Obama is not going to do anything more than than Romney.
Here is the real problem - the financial sector is the symptom of the dying economy, it's not the cause of it. It doesn't produce anything on its own, it can only discover prices and allocate resources, the production is dying not because of the financial sector, but because of the size and power of government, that destroyed the savings, investments and incentives to create the welfare state. Regulating or not regulating the financial sector will do absolutely nothing to fix the economy, this is about as meaningful as your idea on progressive taxes.
"We used to think you could spend your way out of recession and increase employment by boosting government spending, I tell you, in all candour, that that option no longer exists. And in so far as it ever did exist, it only worked on each occasionâ¦ by injecting a bigger dose of inflation into the economy, followed by a higher level of unemployment as the next stepâ¦
As to the energy sources, this is again, a market decision, not government decision to make and it will not be.
There is no difference between Romney and Obama.