Obama’s address: A mixed baggage of good and bad for USA & mankind

Obama’s address: A mixed baggage of good and bad for USA & mankind

Hemraj Jain

The 2012 State of the Union address by President Obama on Tuesday is good on matters namely - community colleges as career centers, elimination of energy waste, priority for drilling for gas, promoting employment opportunities in growing industries in science and technology, repairing and development of infrastructure including improved power grid and high-speed broad band network, national debt reduction, rigorous inspections to prevent counterfeit or unsafe (or even poor quality) goods from crossing US borders, repeal of outdated laws, prosecution of unscrupulous lenders (responsible for housing bubble culminating in on-going economic crises of 2007), policy of minimum government, measures to tackle growing danger of cyber threat etc. – and these will be beneficial for USA.

This address of 2012 is good on also the matters namely - the liberal budget allocation for research and innovation especially in renewable and clean energy, effective laws for stopping piracy of movies, music, and software, support for democracy & open markets etc. - which will be beneficial for not only USA but for the entire mankind too.

Also people world over who were highly disappointed with USA (when its Presidents both Bush and Obama flouted its long cherished values of “Right to property” and “free market” and gave bailouts etc during and after economic crises 2007) will be happy that at least now USA has again started respecting its long cherished values when they hear Obama saying in this 2012 address that - “Let’s never forget: Millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a Government and a financial system that do the same. It’s time to apply the same rules from top to bottom: No bailouts, no handouts, and no copouts. An America built to last insists on responsibility from everybody”.

But the following formulations of Obama are not good rather bad and harmful for USA and also for the mankind (the interest of which USA, presently being the global power & leader, should keep into consideration):-

(1)- Obama’s take that - “It’s time to stop rewarding businesses that ship jobs overseas, and start rewarding companies that create jobs right here in America” – and also “Expand tax relief to small businesses that are raising wages and creating good jobs.” – will (without reviving the founding American value of mobility) hardly help in creating jobs in USA but will certainly help in developing crony-capitalism and uncompetitive businessmen and industrialists in USA with similar effect on the so called entrepreneurs of other countries that will emulate this Obama’s policy. Moreover it goes against what Obama said about minimum government that – “I’m a Democrat. But I believe what Republican Abraham Lincoln believed: That Government should do for people only what they cannot do better by themselves and no more”.

(2)- It’s not enough for Obama to call it unfair when foreign manufacturers get advantage because they are heavily subsidized by their governments. Obama should rather take up this matter at ‘world trade forums’ and advice all the countries to engage in bilateral trade instead of open global trade (as recommended by USA itself to gullible other countries). Rather countries should be advised by USA to trade with other countries only in those items which are not subsidized by either country.

(3)- Obama’s statement that – “Congress should make sure that no foreign company has an advantage over American manufacturing when it comes to accessing finance or new markets like Russia” - tantamount to asking US Congress to make laws which will make US entrepreneurs uncompetitive and which will ultimately be harmful for USA in addition to being unfair to the entrepreneurs of other countries.

(4)- Obama’s statement that – “I believe as strongly as ever that we should take on illegal immigration” – is nothing more than hypocrisy and Obama’s disregard for ‘Rule of Law’ which is evident from his advise to US Congress in the same breath that – “Send me a law that gives them (young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses and defend this country) the chance to earn their citizenship. I will sign it right away”. If Obama (for the reasons best known to him against the interest of US citizens / legal residents) wants to favor or oblige the neighboring countries from where these millions of illegal immigrants (who’s first act on US soil was to break US laws) have come in USA then while respecting the law of the land of USA Obama can ask these neighboring countries to send equal number of their citizens (young people who want to staff US labs, start new businesses and defend USA) legally. Otherwise the law abiding citizens / legal residents of USA and well wishers of USA world over expect that Obama should, without any further delay, initiate the proceedings of identifying, locating and deporting these illegal immigrants or to demand commensurate territories from these neighboring countries (as has been explained in my book ‘Betrayal of Americanism” published by ISOTUT Publisher of USA in 2010).

(5)- But the most dangerous statement of Obama not only for USA but for the entire mankind (which more or less still follows US business practices) is where he says that – “So if you’re a big bank or financial institution, you are no longer allowed to make risky bets with your customers’ deposits. We will also establish a Financial Crimes Unit of highly trained investigators to crack down on large-scale fraud and protect people’s investments”. On the face of it seems to be an attempt by Obama to protect the money of depositors (ordinary people) with banks and other financial institutions. But in reality it is nothing but a veiled exercise to give unprecedented advantage to ‘practitioners of usury’ (the interest earners) as has been explained in my book ‘Betrayal of Americanism” Therefore if Obama is really serious about protecting the interest of people of USA then he should ask for a legislation so that those people who give funds to bank and non banking financial institutions for the purpose of earning interest, the usury, should be converted to equity holders along with the promoters of these banks and other financial institutions and should be expected to enjoy profit and bear losses (of their decisions as is the practice in other sectors of economy) .

(6)- As far his statement – “Right now, Warren Buffett pays a lower tax rate than his secretary” - Obama has unnecessary kept the controversy of taxing the rich “the so called class warfare” alive for so long. This problem can easily be solved if ‘income tax’ is replaced with ‘consumption tax’. After all only the personal consumption of the rich should be taxed and there is no point (i)- in taxing the investment which is made by rich in productive assets (ii)- in giving this potential investment as tax in the hands of government which mostly wastes it in meaningless populist programs (like unemployment allowance to jobless instead of giving them employment directly under departmentally run 'employment guarantee program' mandated under 'Joint-Capitalism' and which will also protect the dignity and self respect of these beneficiaries as explained in my book "Betrayal of Americanism").

(7)- As far Obama’s statement that – “I told the Speaker this summer, I’m prepared to make more reforms that rein in the long term costs of Medicare and Medicaid, and strengthen Social Security, so long as those programs remain a guarantee of security for seniors” – his concerns about health care for the needy and economically vulnerable section of society is genuine. But Obama should realize that the medical services in the United States have long been a matter of derision and ridicule. Because national health expenditure which was only about 5% of GDP in 1960 has now become so much (3-4 times), that the US Government can easily provide free medical services for bottom income percentile of at least two third (to start with) of the US population out of amount which government is already spending on health. This can be done without putting any extra financial burden either on this 75% of population or on the government. Obama should appreciate that other developed countries of the world provide medical services to all the citizens within the amount (percentage of GDP) what US government (Fed + Sate + Local) is already spending on health care. Therefore if government put the meager burden of only prescription drugs, other medical products and other non-durable medical products on the people then government can easily provide free medical services to these 75% (about 230 million) of Americans out of amount which government is already spending on health care.

(8)- As far Obama’s desire to eliminate the so called corrosive influence of money in politics, the conflict of interest is not allowed to legislatives, executives and judiciary in most of the democracies of the world. But if any body thinks that money will not have any influence on politics or politics is meant only for those people who do not want to or can not generate wealth (even huge wealth in this globalize world) then such people are not only living in their make believe world but are also prescribing a sure recipe for the loss of USA’s economic and martial leadership in the world. Rather what is required is simply the effective & total transparency in these matters.

(9)- As far Iran, no justice loving person can buy Obama’s argument. Iran is unnecessarily being harassed and humiliated by USA and its Allies in the name of stopping Iran from having Nukes. Against all the reasons, USA & its Allies think that it and some other countries (including India and Pakistan) have some divine right to posses the nuclear WMDs but countries like Iran, do not have so. As far the past record, USA still remains the only country, which used nukes (in Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan). If USA is really interested in mankind getting rid of these WMDs then forced global denuclearizing through UN in a time bound period is the only solution commensurate with justice instead of war cry which USA and its allies are making which has already sent shock waves especially in developing countries who fear, due to this crises, shortage of petroleum oil and steep rise in its price which is beyond their capacity to bear.

(10)- As far Israel, one fails to understand that how can USA claim itself to be the friend of Israel when it does not help Israel in understanding the reality and in respecting the tenets of justice and on the contrary still keeps Israel mired in two nation theory for Jews and Palestinians and thus unnecessarily endangering the security of Israel. Does USA not known that Palestinians had nothing to do with holocaust. Earlier there were above 90 % Arabs and less than 10 % Jews in old Palestine (present day Israel). There was no movement or armed struggle by Jews in or out of Israel to take Israel back from the Palestinians. Even as per Old Testament Israel does not belong to Jews (rather Jews were taken out from Egypt by Prophet Moses and were asked to kill the then residents of and capture this ‘Promised Land’ of Israel).Moreover even Netanyahu wants one state solution when he said during his address to joint session of US Congress on 5/24/ 2011 that – “So it is therefore absolutely vital for Israel’s security that a Palestinian state be fully demilitarized. And it is vital that Israel maintain a long-term military presence along the Jordan River”. This demand of Netanyahu certainly tantamount to ‘one State’ of Israel for Jews and Palestinians because without its armed forces Palestine will not be a second full fledged State.

Therefore people world over expect that USA will take course correction as mentioned above which will be commensurate with its status of global power and leader in the interest of democratic secular world order, globalization, free market economy and human rights.

Email: jainhemraj59@gmail.com