Sunday, June 29, 2008

Shock Gallop Poll

New Gallop Pole. A shocker to me, at least in one aspect.
The aspect I was stunned by was the following I lifted directly from the above article.
PRINCETON, NJ -- When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% --prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.
What struck me was the above numbers when compared to the reasonably close numbers in the rest of the article. The rest of the numbers seemed to follow accepted differences between the parties. So what was the difference of the first set of numbers. Why did all parties and all income brackets favor the first .

It seems apparent to me that the survey reflected the idea people have which favors doing something about the cause of the problems, and that they thought that redistributing the wealth doesn’t do anything about the root cause. Again the quote
Prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.
The American people want things done to fix the problems we face and they overwhelmingly seem to be saying that taxing the people with money more will not do it. Rather they want the government to focus on the problems and fix them.

The other questions fall back to normal predictable results. Those questions deal with whether the government should do more or less to help, vs. letting the individual do more to help themselves.

My take on this is that the People want solutions that are directly tied to the fixing of the problem in a concrete way. The article seemed to think the recent stimulus cash advance was popular on both sides of the aisle. I’m stipulating that, but also point out that the people with whom this was so popular was the Legislators, not necessarily the people. Have you seen the popularity or lack thereof the Legislators have with the public. The popularity the stimulus package had with the legislators as I see it comes from offering them a chance to legally buy votes. I would agree that choice was probably popular with those doing the buying. The question is, does the majority of Americans think that practice is the best way of fixing the problem??

The citizens took the money, why not? I ask what concrete choice did the people have. Is there a way to change the choices out there? You bet. This recent push across the board by the Republicans on Energy is putting a choice out there that the American people are overwhelmingly in favor of. A choice that does something concrete about the oil shortage which is driving up the cost at the pump. The “All of the Above” energy plan of the Republicans is offering a choice. (Finally). Maybe this gallop poll will help to turn some Democrats facing close elections to swing in favor of more drilling as a more realistic way of increasing production than taxing the producers out of business. They already (the legislators) have shown they know how to bribe the people. Now they have a chance if they grab it to show the people that they can actually create concrete solutions that works. The people would feel better and I bet our reps will too. Remember in our quiver, that this gallop poll showed off another one of our arrows. Overall the majority of Americans still believe 50%-43% according to the poll that the government should do less. That is enough to easily win a national election. If Republicans can force some votes on their energy bills then we may have a chance to show the concrete plans we have created. We have a chance to offer a solution that works through less government. Gosh what a novel thing. The people may think otherwise. They might just start to think differently about the people against a realistic common sense approach to helping them with gas prices.

The article concluded the following.
-----from the article-----
On the other hand, the economic turbulence of 2008 could end up getting government into significant new income and wealth redistribution programs unless the Treasury and the Federal Reserve act soon to stabilize and reduce today's unmanageable food and energy price increases.
That conclusion I don’t agree with because it assumes that the government will do nothing other than a wealth and redistribution program. Then states the reason for what will happen will be that the Treasury and The Federal Reserve did nothing. It is assuming that only they can change things. Why I ask is that? Common practice maybe, but It’s not written in stone anyplace. I like to be more positive. I’d like to think the Constitution was written for a reason. That we have a representative democracy. Why not assume that the Federal Reserve will do nothing, and that our elected representatives will wake up and seize the moment; partially in response to the Gallop Poll numbers and other wildly popular Petitions (drill here, drill now). Perhaps they will realize they want to keep their jobs and will be the ones to do something concrete. On top of that how can the Fed increase production of food and oil?

Scratching my head over that logic but smiling over the ammunition the Gallop Poll has given those of our elected Representatives who are willing to offer that 84% of the population desiring a solution, some other choice than us throwing the Bums out.

Regards, Live Dangerously Be A Conservative

No comments: