In a recent poll by Politico, they asked "Which of the following comes closest to your own views when you think about the United States?" The number one answer to that question that made the morning headlines was: "Things in the U.S. feel like they are out of control right now.........64%
Other poll results:
Do you consider yourself to be either a supporter or not a supporter of the Tea Party movement?
- Supporter...17%
- Not a supporter...58%
- Not sure...25%
Do you think that things in the nation are:
- Generally headed in the right direction...20%
- Off on the wrong track...50%
- Not sure...30%
- Decline to answer...1%
Thinking ahead several years, is your outlook about the United States generally optimistic or generally pessimistic?
- Optimistic...49%
- Pessimistic...50%
Do you approve or disapprove of the job performance of...
President Obama:
- NET: Approve.............47%
- NET: Disapprove.........53%
Democrats in Congress:
- NET: Approve.............38%
- NET: Disapprove.........61%
Republicans in Congress
- NET: Approve............30%
- NET: Disapprove........70%
* My note: I've noticed that overall, Obama is more favored than either the Democrats or the Republicans in Congress, but the emphasis in the media is that more people disapprove of Obama than approve — as can be demonstrated here at Politico in the first image of the article.
On Obamacare: 41% favor repealing the Affordable Care Act and 41% think their healthcare will get worse with Obamacare — and 57% think they will pay more.
* My note: The poll doesn't ask if they know the difference between Obamacare and the Affordable Care Act — or that it provides for
Medicaid. A CNBC
survey found that 46% of Americans oppose Obamacare, yet only 37% oppose the Affordable Care Act.
Which party do you think is closer to big business and Wall Street? Democrats, Republicans, or are both parties equally close to big business and Wall Street?
- Republicans.......................39%
- Democrats...........................9%
- Both parties equally close....51%
* My note: The poll didn't ask how they thought about Progressives, such as Elizabeth Warren, who want to reform Wall Street.
In the last year, have you posted political-oriented content or commentary on a social media site? 81% said "no".
44% say they think of themselves as a "moderate".
* My note: A study by the Democratic think tank Third Way, which claims to promote what it believes to be more "centrist" policies (Hillary Clinton is a centrist, and favors Wall Street), finds "moderates" are most likely to answer the question “do you favor a larger government providing more services or a smaller government providing fewer services,” with “I do not think of government in those terms” or “I don’t know.”
But an article in The Washington Post contends that “moderates possess lower levels of political information and are less likely to be politically engaged than those who are closer to one of the ideological poles.” But when asked more pointed questions, 53% of moderate responders answered that they were more concerned with the government not doing enough for the economy.
When asked, 17% said they had a member of their household who belonged to a labor union.
* My note: I also noticed that half of those polled had household incomes greater than $75,000 a year and 79% owned a home — and only half were paid employees (wage earners). If the poll had only asked millionaires these questions, or only those with incomes of $27,519 a year (the U.S. median income) the answers would be quite different — and would most likely be more favorable to the Democrats. Sentier Research reports the median annual household income in July 2014 was $54,045 — which would indicate a dual (or multiple) income household earning the median wage of $27,519.10 (x2 = $55,038.20)
Language of Politico poll interview: English...97% (a far greater percentage of the actual U.S. demographics).
Of course we are out of control... we are on the verge of a total economic collapse unprecedented in the history of this country. The US was lucky enough to avoid two other huge economic collapses in it's history. The first was during the gold rush. The economy should have completely tanked but since people were literally digging money out of the ground in gold the massive injection of liquidity into the economy prevented the collapse. The second collapse that didn't happen was when the US left the gold standard and began printing tons of cash as it quickly became the global reserve petro dollar under Nixon. By doing this it had the same effect as the huge amounts of gold being injected into the economy during the gold rush.
ReplyDeleteThe Fed printing more money is trying to use the same principle today. The idea is that unlimited printing of liquidity into the economy will prevent a major collapse. In concept it would work, however, things are much different than the gold rush and the separation of the gold standard. At those times the dollar was backed by something tangible, gold or oil. The printing by the Fed today is backed by nothing. The world is different where there are huge threats to US dominance of global economics. Russia is challenging our authority, the Chinese are buying up everything and becoming an economic and manufacturing powerhouse. Printing money limitlessly would normally prevent a collapse and without inflation, however if we see a departure from the dollar by most in the world then we'll be left holding the bag with staggering inflation.
Somehow if the US can force China and Russia out of existing and development markets for energy sales, the US could rebound. This is why you're seeing the US making moves to destabilize regions and countries that have important roles in the acquisition of or distribution of natural resources. When the world is in chaos is when the US (not China) dominates the world economy. Take Africa for example. You've got ISIS closing in on the Eastern border of the continent and you've got Ebola ripping up the western side. Everywhere else you've had revolutions and unstable governments, like Mali, Libya, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia. Those are all areas China was attempting to make moves in. Now it's either full of extremists, disease, or messed up governments with insufficient political footing to make international business deals with China.
For US to succeed in printing unlimited funds to float the floundering economy, it must provide some foundation to support the printing and to ease inflation. The US must find something to replace the oil or gold rush from the other two escaped collapses. Figure out what they're going to attempt to use then you'll understand what's really going on and where it's going to go. Unlike the past, this time it won't be nearly as easy to pull off like it was when people were just digging money out of the ground. We'll be able to tell if the plan doesn't work when we begin to see inflation happening.