Obama in his 1st State of the Union address yesterday disappointed many of us in India by saying "You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China's not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany's not waiting. India's not waiting. These nations aren't standing still. These nations aren't playing for second place. They're putting more emphasis on math and science. They're rebuilding their infrastructure. They are making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs."Is Obama, trying to create a enemy or threat which never exist and try to get his bills passed or trying to cover-up his lack of execution to tackle domestic problems. There is 10-15% of unemployment in US. He had promised a lot on Employment, healthcare, but there is no significant work done on these areas.
I thought India and US are Strategic Partners in various areas. India is growing, it was not shaken by the economic crisis, we are learning to grow as stable economy, but US is far ahead of us in terms of "First place". The economy of India is the twelfth largest economy in the world by nominal value and the fourth largest by purchasing power parity (PPP). How can Obama mislead US people and leaders by creating India as threat for US Economy?
US Inc are outsourcing their jobs to make use of low operating cost in countries like India, which would yield revenue. Also, when we are in the world of globalization, when we are in the world of global customers, when US Companies are in peak of its competition to sell its product offering with low cost...how can we restrict companies to have jobs only in US. When we have customer in Asia to buys a product, making it in US and shipping it would cost more...how can economy of US will grow....
We need more of Collaborative growth between India and US. We have Knowledge power, low operating cost. US should make use of it. and OBAMA should focus on Organic growth and do some real stuff. I had expected more from Obama after hearing his campaign speeches. But after a year also, he is speaking more...which is great. but he is losing his credibility.
In fact, each nation is focusing of its own growth. You name it as India, China, or Germany. They are focusing on how to increase their GDP growth, creating employment opportunities, improving Health care, education infrastructure.
Instead of creating fear psychosis, Obama need to act quickly before millions of my friends in USA loss their trust with their president.
Let his action speak more then words...
http://www.ndtv.com/news/world/full_text_of_obamas_1st_state_of_the_union_address.php
Let me know your point of view ….
2 comments:
Sundar, I think you misread / misunderstood what President Obama said. He was not "creating fear psychosis" among the American people - that's what his incompetent, war mongering, former cheerleader predecessor used to do. He was not "trying to create a [sic] enemy or threat which never exist and try to get his bills passed or trying to cover-up his lack of execution to tackle domestic problems". He was drawing a contrast, for the very slow, very myopic, very nationalistic Americans whom he was addressing. He was trying to say, I believe, "we can't sit here moping and stagnant while other countries are advancing on the competitive international stage. We have to innovate."
This misreading by non Americans is not hard for me to understand as an informed US citizen who has traveled outside my country's borders to over 2 dozen nations, filling 2 passports with stamps, and keeping an open mind. The State of the Union address was meant for domestic consumption primarily. YES, Asia, Europe, Middle East, S.America, Australia, Canada all listened to it as well... and a small portion of Africa listened to it as well, but that's not who President Obama was aiming his speech towards. The international community Loves President Obama, after 8 dark years of Bush. Even the Doomsday Clock recently moved back 1 whole minute, citing President Obama's more open, less unilateral, more collaborative approach to foreign policy.
The US legislative system was designed for a very small, very concentrated population of less than 2 million people along the Atlantic Coast, wherein each state got 1 congressman for every 30,000 citizens living there, proportioned by smaller districts within that state and every state also got 2 senators. The first US Congress (in 1789) 2 centuries ago, had 26 Senators (13 states x 2) and 65 Representative, in proportion to how large or small each state's population was. South Carolina got 5 reps, and 2 senators. Delaware, which was tiny, got 1 rep and 2 senators. Virginia, which at that time was HUGE, got 10 representatives and 2 senators. So the powers were balanced, small states had some influence, but not too much. Large states could not bully the smaller ones too much. Also, average life spans in the 1700s, even among rich white land owners (the only ones who could hold office or vote at that time) was only into their 60s, so "term limits" was a simple fact of life. No one could serve 3 or 4 or 5 six year terms - they would die long before they got re-elected.
But today, the US has 300 million people, 465 representatives, or 1 congress person for every 690K people. The congressmen are detached, aloof from their constituents needs. they spend all of their time raising money to be re-elected. 95% of them GET re-elected, because they have Gerrymandered each election district through previous legislation that virtually guarantees the incumbent will be victorious.
(continued next post)
The Senators, who used to be balanced in power with the lower house Representatives, are now Power Crazy. Every one of them is a millionaire, and every one of them wants to be President some day. The tiny states, with populations of less than 1 million people, have 2 Senators and 1 Representative, and those Senators wield IMMENSE Power and influence in the upper chamber. the recent health care legislation was "debated" by a group of 6 Senators from rural districts whose states combined had less than 3% of the entire US population within them. So 3% were holding the rest of the country hostage, crafting inane and arcane legislation that benefited the less populous states and greatly punished the larger more populous states.
The end result? Grid lock. Partisan fighting. Absolutely zero cooperation between the 2 ruling parties - and that's another thing. The US has ONLY 2 parties. For the last 100 years, the national elections have been 2 party races. This narrow system benefits the 2 parties, strengthening them, creating powerful political machines. Such political machines Ignore the common man, and work to win elections based upon fear, bias, religious beliefs, and secular divisions, and not upon facts, logic, science, and the common good.
So it was to these Senators and Representatives - old men, these sticks in the mud, career politicians who never had to meet a payroll, or care for the sick or poor, who never had to struggle to get through their college educations, or whose families were not stricken with severe illnesses or poverty - that he was speaking. He was also addressing the 9 members of the Supreme Court, who were seated in the front row, and who had JUST made a sweeping court ruling last week that enables BILLIONS of dollars of corporate funding to BUY Elections.
The President has no direct power over the Legislative branch in the US. He can try to persuade and influence, but he cannot disband, or re-appoint them. The 2 parties have been at a stand still for almost 2 years, since the Republicans lost their majority. the Republicans vote as one conservative monolithic block. They do not dissent within their ranks. The Democrats are a circular firing squad, squabbling amongst themselves about everything, comprised of moderates, liberals, all sorts of members. President Obama is also a Democrat, but he is a rather moderate one, who has been branded and labeled by his opponents as the next Lenin, Hitler, or Mao.
What President Obama WAS doing, subtly I think, is saying "Look Americans, other nations that don't have this awful grid lock, where they have many political parties who truly represent their citizens, are moving ahead, while we here in the US bicker like stubbornly selfish children in a two party combative system. Wake Up people, or the US will be left as a 3rd class nation soon."
That's my take on it. I still believe that President Obama is much better than what a President McCain.. or.. heaven forbid President Palin would have resulted in. I am hoping that Congress Can ACT and Enact legislation instead of continuing the bickering, to help reduce unemployment. Parkalam. =)
Post a Comment