.

Are You Better Off Now Than You Were 4 Years Ago?

That's the question of the election, right? Or is it?

It started with a debate point by Ronald Reagan in 1980. Here's what he said (see the attached YouTube video to hear it):

Next Tuesday is Election Day. Next Tuesday all of you will go to the polls, will stand there in the polling place and make a decision. I think when you make that decision, it might be well if you would ask yourself, are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe, that we're as strong as we were four years ago? And if you answer all of those questions yes, why then, I think your choice is very obvious as to whom you will vote for. If you don't agree, if you don't think that this course that we've been on for the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.

The question comes up now every four years. Pundits leaped when a supporter of President Barack Obama — Maryland's Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley — fumbled the question during an interview on CBS This Morning a few weeks ago. No, he said, but that's not the question of this election.

Later, the Obama campaign came back strong and amended its answer, claiming in ads that "The middle class is carrying a heavy load in America, but Romney doesn’t see it." And they sent Vice President Joe Biden out to remind Americans that "Osama bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."

Those facts notwithstanding, the Romney campaign doesn't answer that question the same way. Mitt Romney's running mate, Paul Ryan, even says Jimmy Carter — the president Reagan's unseated in 1980 — showed more leadership than Obama.

How do you see it? Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Is that the right question to ask this time around?

PaulRevere September 29, 2012 at 11:41 PM
John Adams: the 80%-20% rule is total Socialism. Let me provide my basis. "Any time competition is lessened or removed from a service or product" You have socialism. Doctors , nurses Hospitals, Drug companies are "HEALTH CARE". Obama's 80-20 rule is not Care. It is a Gimmick. That's my "Frustration" Raising premiums is NOT Capitalism! No one should have to buy Health Insurance. We are asked for our insurance card, but you can say , I will pay it --"Send me the bill.". Society has been brainwashed about needing Health Unsurance, so they (or their employer) pays $12,000 a year in advance, for WHAT? Freedom to buy only what you need is capitalism. Health insurance companies "Compete" for your Dollar "before" you get any Health Care. The 80%-20% rule eliminates that competition. All Insurance companies now come under Socialistic Controls. They cannot make any more than 20% of their Premiums. Sounds "profit-limiting", but it's NOT. Insurance Companies all previously had to watch how much they paid out in Medical Claims to help their bottom line. Giving them all equal 20% bottom lines will Kill this country's Capitalism "competition" in all Health insurance. Obama-Tax does nothing to reduce HealthCare costs. Reduced competition will kill your Wallet! The 80-20 rule makes sense for the "Uneducated" Americans. I guess that means a lot of Democrats. "two tens for a Five is the new Math"? "snake oil salesman among us. Medical-Ins is Not Medical-Care.
PaulRevere September 30, 2012 at 12:01 AM
I have come to conclude "Obamacare" is exactly like our Mandated "Public School TAXES". Forcing All to Pay for "Education" from Government operated schools is exactly how this Obamacare works. It Taxes ALL to buy Advance Health care, whether you need it now or not. Just like public schools, it will run out of control, costings Thousands of Dollars in Additional INCOME TAXES when we file our year end tax returns. It starts and hooks you early, with little cost, But then BAM! BAM! BAM! You will all be supporting health care for everyone else who claims they cannot afford it. Welcome a new $10,000 per year Real Estate tax imposed on Every American. Add that to the already high School tax and people---You will be "SLAVES" to your Government Workers. That's the "NEW SLAVERY" I am screaming about. All you Public service workers here will eventually be the targets of Big pay cuts when that happens. All because of not listening to Paul Revere warning "SOCIALISM IS HERE". China feeds on Capitalism. (No innovation) (steal Inventions) (copying hard work discoveries) Europe will fail as soon as America turns more socialistic. Emphasis on the "worker's rights" and not the Owner's Investment rights is rampant all around us. And The Question here is : "ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE 4 YEARS AGO" Reagan was talking to the "PLURAL" YOU. (That means the Country) Unfortunately, almost all reply in the "selfish You". The "I" word.
PaulRevere September 30, 2012 at 12:24 AM
NONE of us are better off than 4 years ago. The supreme Court has authorized the Federal Govt. to FORCE 250million Americans to Buy something you do not need. (INSURANCE) (Just to benefit 40million people who claim they cannot afford it) Now, if all 250 mil just put $500 a year into a pot--that would equal $125 billion dollars. Does anyone want to calculate how much that gives everyone who cannot afford health care? $125B divide by 40mil =? (Yes= $3,000 + per year) That buys a very good basic health coverage today. Everyone gets on with life -no Employer $2,000 per employee costs to consider. You don't need 2,000 pages of regulations to do that. Our Federal Govt is Out of Control. Their Ends do not justify the means.
Lo Emet October 21, 2012 at 11:26 AM
Who is better off? Obama sure is, as is Romney. The people that can afford to invest millions and also afford to lose millions. When I vote in November, I'm sorry, but I have to vote thinking of myself, and my family first. Nothing Obama has done in the last 4 years have done me any good, and I sure as heck am not going to believe his promises for the next 4. When he came into office he had a house and a senate that were controlled by the Democrats, and still couldnt figure out how to bring the country together. His experience in running an organization and his experience in bringing people together to put a plan in place was nil. Romney, although not my first choice, has plenty of experience in creating jobs, in creating wealth, in bringing people together for a common goal and getting to that goal. Dont tell me about Romney and china and the cayman islands..anyone that has money in a retirement fund has investments in places that if they checked on..they'd dislke. Bottom lin..Obama had his chance..all he did was blame Bush.
The Missourian October 21, 2012 at 01:20 PM
Revere - Do you even know what the 80/20 rule is? It means 80% of your business typically comes from 20% of your customers.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »