Ever wonder why the Democrats really are pushing this partisan health care bill through, despite the majority of Americans being against it? Perhaps it’s what lies on the horizon, both of which they are well aware is about to happen, and that they knowingly caused… a second time.
Many political analyst believe that if the Democrats push through the health care very quickly, that the general public will be forgiving. Case in point, when the Louisiana Legislature tried to push through pay raises for theirselves, the Louisiana citizens rose up in defiance and began to threaten recall. Enough legislators backed off that threat and the pay raises never went through. Not even Governor Bobby Jindal was above the criticism, but the failure to get the pay raise to go through and the fact that Hurricane Gustav hit Louisiana shortly afterwards helped silence the general public.
But while the general public may seem to have a short memory, it’s much easier to forget differences when the general public wins, and not the elected officials. On healthcare, the general public lost, and the politicians have won. This is one round that the general public won’t forget anytime soon.
There are other differences as well. The pay raises only had to do with how public dollars were spent, whereas this health care bill will increase premiums that people pay for their health insurance. It’s one thing to mismanage public dollars, but now congress and President Obama is creating a mandatory non-tax, a non-tax in which the government doesn’t necessarily collect, but is also creating inequalities, forcing most to pay the few. Not only will you have to pay additional cost of insurance, but you will be forced to pay for other people’s health care as well.
I have come to the conclusion that when people are generally happy, they don’t care what governments do, just so long as the government does not interfere with their happiness. Even when they are not happy, if the government isn’t causing that unhappiness, people understand it’s not the government and do not hold it against the government. But when governments take an active role in people’s happiness, they also take on the burden of their misery, and as such, people will then turn against the government.
When governments irresponsibly spend the public dollars, people tend to forgive and forget, unless that spending begins to infringe on their happiness. This is why war captivates the public’s attention. People understand there is a reason to go to war, they also understand that it could bring misery to their lives. It’s important that all wars are justifiable because lives will be lost, misery will hit a lot of households, and the existing government can, and will, eventually lose the support of the people. When misery hits enough homes and the war appears to be endless, the people turn against the war.
What Senator Mary Landrieu has chosen to do was to appease those who wish for benefits at the expense of others. This will not be met with the same forgiveness as pay raises for elected officials was. It comes down to this, most people were happy with their health insurance prior to the meddling of Senator Mary Landrieu and President Barack Obama. It would have been one thing for them to reform health care to cover a few people that were without health care, but they didn’t stop there. Most people didn’t want their own health care changed in the process, most people wanted government to stay out of their own lives, and Senator Mary Landrieu has chosen to fix that which most people felt worked fine.
Think of it like this, your neighbor has a broken window, he decides he’s going to fix it on his own. In the process he breaks six more windows, plus he sets your house on fire. You could care less that he broke his own windows, you’ll put the blame squarely on his shoulders for his broken windows, but when he set your house on fire… well, he best just stay away from you. Senator Landrieu has effectively ignited fire in other people’s lives, and they aren’t going to forget it soon.
But, let’s talk about the problem on the horizon, let’s talk about the coming housing crash of 2010. Did anybody notice how well the “Cash for Clunkers” program worked? It worked so well that the federal government expanded it, right? But after that initial jolt in the arm the government created, what happened then? After giving the auto industry a 13% boost in sales, the industry saw sales drop off when the “Cash for Clunkers” ended. Why is this? Because “Cash for Clunkers” did not appeal to people who were not in the car market, it appealled to the people who were considering buying a car within the next year. If you were thinking of buying a new car, then cash for clunkers became an incentive to you to go ahead and trade in that old car and get a new one while you could benefit from the government program. That means if you were planning to buy a car in November-May 2010, you probably purchased that new car already. “Cash for Clunkers” effectively took people out of December – May 2010’s market and put them into a new car, leaving only people who need to buy are new car out of necessity left to purchase one. (ie old car becomes to expensive to fix, car accident totals current car).
The housing market differs in that purchasing a home is not as necessary as purchasing a car. You can rent a home, an apartment, room with other people, but you have to have transportation to go back and forth to work. We need a place to live, but purchasing a home is not a necessity. A car is much more inexpensive than a house is, and when people purchase a home, they will think about it for a long time before they act on it.
Unfortunately the governemnt told people through it’s actions that homes are $8,000 overpriced, and in order to keep home prices high, the government is giving an $8,000 tax credit that ended in November. Even though it was extended, those homes, like “Cash for Clunkers”, were purchased by people who were looking to buy a home in future markets. It took people out of the market in 2010 and put them into the 2009 statistics. This is an artificial high, and like the drop off that happened when “Cash For Clunkers” was originally supposed to end, so will new home sales. Only new home sales doesn’t have the advantage that car sales has. A buyer/seller market applies more to home sales than it does car sales. The more of a buyer market there is, the less people will build new homes to be sold, the less people will be willing to sell their existing home, the more the market staggers.
The $8,000 tax credit tried to keep the housing industry as a sellers market, but in the end they will create a much bigger buyers market. Home sales will see a dramatic fall off as the year goes on… and with it goes much of the remaining support the Democrat party has. Welcome to Hopelessness and Sparechange. The good news is, there’s only three years left of Barack Hussein Obama.