Debate: Should Obama get his second term?
Side: No

We just entered and exited a great worldwide recession over a period of three years, in which Obama spent almost a trillion in economic stimulus.Which hasn't done anything except waste 1 trillion dollars on borrowed money.Proof: 9.7% unemployment in America.Plus, we were in war, which is always expensive.Which is a waste. Money wasted due to two warmongers, Bush and Obama.One other thing, prove for me that governments cannot create wealth.Creating jobs and wealth is interchangeably linked because if jobs are created by producing an new good or service, then wealth is created, so in a capitalist economy, government has no assets to produce anything without taxation that is taken out of the private sector, government doesn't create jobs and wealth, it merely transfers jobs and wealth from private to public. Government spending has three sources of misrepresented stimulus.1. Taxation doesn't create new jobs or wealth because it only transfers wealth from one who creates new wealth. Sure, government employees received incomes, but it is at the expense of those who produce. Government employees don't produce anything new, they only take from the general public.2. Government borrowing is just as inadequate as taxation, yet at least in taxation, it is paid. It reduces investment in capital, labor and land. Consequently, this translates into fewer new factories, machines, and homes being built. Not only does this decrease in private investment slow economic growth, it results in additional unemployment in these industries. Government borrowing has the illusion of wealth.3. The worst source of additional government spending is creating new money either by simply printing more money or lower interest rates. Thus, this monetary event always results in inflation by eroding the value of the currency, and consequently, it started the Great Depression.In addition,"But though government can consume wealth and redistribute wealth, it can't create wealth. And unless wealth is created, there is nothing to consume or redistribute. That's why -- even when government is doing something we all agree must be done or most of us want to have it do -- government is a parasite. All it has is what it takes from the producers of wealth... For the economy to grow, government must shrink." Wealth 1"In a capitalistic economy, labor and capital freely flows to the most productive enterprises precisely because they’re the most profitable. All government can do is inefficiently redistribute wealth that the private sector creates."Wealth 2"But it is a fallacy of the Keynesian legacy that government can reduce unemployment by priming the pump with spending programs. Government needs to reduce spending and taxes in order to leave income in the hands of individuals who earned it and who can spend it much more efficiently than the government can." Jobs 1"Governments have only three ways of paying employees — taxes, borrowing and printing money. Each of those reduces income and wealth among those paying taxes, servicing debts or stuck with shrinking greenbacks. In short, governments can't "create jobs." Adding government jobs is never a net addition to employment opportunities, because it means a heavier burden on private employers and employees. " Jobs 2"It overlooks the fact that, in the real world, government can’t inject money into the economy without first taking money out of the economy. More specifically, the theory only looks at one-half of the equation — the part where government puts money in the economy’s right pocket. But where does the government get that money? It borrows it, which means it comes out of the economy’s left pocket. There is no increase in what Keynesians refer to as aggregate demand. Keynesianism doesn’t boost national income, it merely redistributes it." Jobs 3"When the government attempts to create a job, all of these natural forces are removed. The market has produced no demand for the government-created job. In other words, no buyer has voluntarily agreed to purchase those services, because to do so under current market conditions would be unprofitable. Were it profitable to hire someone to do the government-created job, an employer would have done so voluntarily. So, the government steps in and forces the taxpayer to purchase those services against his will. In additional to violating the taxpayer’s rights, the entire coordination that existed between employer, employee, and consumer is disrupted. " Jobs 4To illustrate further, this is what government does to destroy wealth or job creation because it thinks it can create jobs and wealth. WATCH VIDEOI agree (more or less) with the healthcare reforms, his overturning of policies involving Embryonic Stem Cells, the "Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act", "Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010" and his ending of the War in Iraq.More insurance isn't going to contain costs in premiums and deductibles. It is only going be more expensive. When you buy a car, you pay for what you get. If you want a Mercedes E-Class, you have to pay for it compared to a Ford Fiesta. More coverage = more money. This is what the bill does, just more insurance.As for Embryonic Stem Cells, it should be left to private research. Polo's cure was invented by a private scientist, not government, where in the goodness of his heart, he donated it without patents for profit.As for Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal, we will see how effective it is in the years to come. One way or another, I don't care. Military recruitment should be non compulsive and open to anyone regardless. Why does the government need to even know your sexual orientation? WHY RED TAPE!! That is irrelevant to a solider.because only Libertarians support doing nothing as massive businesses go bankrupt and take their employees and investors with them.Again, you are an odd creature, you absolutely chastise business because it is inherently corrupt and greedy, but get all sympathetic for big business when they go bankrupt because of bad management. Where is your sympathy for when small bushiness goes out of business? There is none because that is business. Bad management equals failure, and you support it. No wonder you like government. You enjoy bad management.Not all of these were related to Bush however.Doesn't matter. It was still failure of government. It is central planning at its finest. A series of failures, but no sees that. It is government attempting to control to many things, and it fails.How about some new blood that understands the issues of today? We don't need fossils screwing up progress due to their old prejudices.Looks like someone has a conspiracy, someone who doesn't engage in conspiracies.That controversy is as accurate as the Obama not born in America.