January 21, 2009

Op-Ed Columnist - Radical in the White House - NYTimes.com

Op-Ed Columnist - Radical in the White House - NYTimes.com

Thomas Friedman certainly has received his dose of enthusiasm for the Obama Presidency. Nevertheless, as Friedman along with so many others raise expectations, Obama himself seems to have been lowering them in his speeches before the inauguration. It's a delicate balance. Surely Obama needs to tap into the enthusiasm that his charisma has generated. This IS an auspicious moment, but the problems and inertia are massive. Despite the emotion and rhetoric, I am not convinced that Americans are persuaded to sacrifice willingly while they are enmeshed in an involuntary downgrading of their economic well-being from this recession. I think they want things to go back to what they perceive as a better time.

The borrowing and entitlement culture runs very deep in this country and to reverse it quickly may not be possible. "Change We Can Believe In" will be extraordinarily difficult to deliver. I think we may be able to it, but it will require a full generation and a dramatic reduction in our standard of living. We simply cannot afford the excessively consumptive lifestyle of the past.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

Maybe Obama should be more radical. While I'm for Obama, I am keeping score. And at this point he's at -1 because in my view he should have rejected his choice of Tim Geithner at Treasury Sec. He actually attempted to blame his failure to pay his taxes on the Turbo-Tax application he was using. Liar! We don't need anyone except the most honest in this position. We don't need any more Paulsons! So, what did Obama's economic committee member Paul Volker think of this selection? I would really like to know.

Why is it that the closer a person has their hands to the money the more we tend to allow them to play by different rules? No way!