The closing statements said a lot. There was McCain, appealing to the American voters to let him fulfill his destiny, to serve Americans again, and Obama, focusing on how he wants to change policies to rescue America from this slippery slope.
You must have seen it all, read it all, how McCain sneered and rolled his eyes as Obama spoke; how Obama smiled as McCain criticized him. McCain was simply unpleasant. He wasn't always like this, go back and google his appearances on Conan, Leno or even The Daily Show. He spoke his mind. He was fun. But, I suppose as a Republican candidate (after all, he is not running as an independent candidate) he was taken more traditional positions.
But it all boils down to policies and the Republicans severe aversion to having the government involved in people's private lives. (Although, under Bush, the government was not only in their phones, but now is nationalizing banks, which for them, really, is a strict no-no.) Coming from India, we are well used to the government with its finger in every pie. In fact, over here we want more privatization. We feel that is more effective. But let's also keep in mind that if private companies were allowed to do what they wanted -- as has happened in the States -- one would need to government to come out and sort everyone out. Obama's basic argument is that private players have not always been able to solve problems, because they don't have larger policy issues in mind, but profits for themselves and shareholders. That's not wrong, but a country needs a long-term plan too. Even here, say the phone companies hiked up charges to insane amounts, we would expect the government to step in and tell them to calm down. Remember the common man, and all that. ((Same to same Obama.))
I won't bother recapping other arguments they have, you know them. But I did see something on BBC that is worth recounting. They reported, last night as I lay awake at 3am for no reason, that America has seen shopping sales drop drastically in this year -- and the trend seems to have started even before reports of a financial crisis. The country -- despite problems -- has always depended on the American consumer to spend, spend, spend, thereby reviving the economy. That's why, as I understand it, Republicans say taxing the rich doesn't make sense. Then they'll have more money to spend, and it will all go back into the economy and trickle down. Well, clearly, that's not the case.
So, is it worth taxing the rich so that government has the money that it must necessarily spend on some kind of reform, research, relief, instead of a jacuzzi?
I guess my point is that a mixed economy seems to make the most sense.