Obama: Massive redistribution of wealth

In all honesty, I am all for efficiency and productivity but I wouldn't mind a little tax increase if I knew it was going towards the less-fortunate. Tax money is being used to bail out companies, fund wars, and give aid to OTHER countries so why not give a little to your OWN citizens?!

But then again, I'm not even American. I live in Canada, so why should I care? :P

Although I am disgusted with government bailouts of corporations, here's the crucial difference. At least these firms do make a contribution to society by providing jobs, goods, and services. In sharp contrast, the ones who will benefit from an obama presidency are the welfare moms with six kids who know that the government will take care of them and the crack addicts who have never tried to better themselves.

I have no doubt about that. Crack addicts, criminals, lazy people...you can't get rid of them.

But now the other side of coin: I came from a low-income family, immigrated here (Canada) when I was 3 after my country was torn by war. We were 4 children with 2 hard-working parents. I can now say that were are a household that earns well over 250k a year. Guess why? We never had to worry about things like healthcare, education, government aid to help my mom while she went to university AND raised us, etc. My parents were focused on giving us a better life and they had the opportunity to do that. That's all I'm saying, maybe this "redistribution of wealth" might give the less-fortunate more opportunity to become more productive/efficient.

But then again, I could be completely wrong...mehhh.

Mez, i sympathize with what you went through and respect your success. But the fact of the matter is, government attempts to help the poor have always failed since the 1960's. It makes people dependent on government rather than empowering them. Even FDR's New Deal actually made the Great Depression a lot worse.

As the great American Ronald Reagan once said, "government is the problem, not the solution."

here we go again....

I agree with jjc1122. Reagan indeed had the courage to say it.

But I think govt is the only enemy of people.

Friedman said once - There are 4 ways to spend money -

1) Spend your money on yourself.
2) Spend your money on someone else.
3) Spend someone else's money on yourself.
4) Spend someone else's money on someone else.

Obama plans to do the 4th one.

Vicks.

Reagan is one of the greatest presidents in history. Man, we could really use him now, to deliver us from the onslaught of socialism.

...lower taxes are fantastic, really. I think everyone is for everyone paying lower taxes. However, it isn't that simple. We have a trillion dollar war and overall foreign policy that we cannot afford (and is essentially completely funded by foreign debt) AND social security which is essentially bankrupt.

Now, I know what people might say: "You shouldn't rely on social security, that's bullshit, save your money responsibly, etc etc" but it isn't that easy. Nor can you just do that, if you don't do something to fix social security, you've essentially pulled a bait-and-switch on millions of Americans who were told by the government that it would be there for them when they retire. You can't fault people for expecting social security and not having the foresight to see that it would eventually become a bankrupt system. Not to mention, you can't fix the shit when you don't have the money (which once again goes back to our trillion dollar war in Iraq and overall foreign policy).

Furthermore, the whole argument that success is punished is a whole lot of bullshit. Yes, there are "drug addicts" and lazy people out there and people who intend on living off of welfare. However, there are many Americans who do not live a hard life by choice or through negligence. Tell that bullshit to people whose steel jobs have been shipped overseas or whose auto manufacturing job is now in Mexico. Yes, there are economic benefits in the long-run to importing goods from countries where the cost of labor/materials/etc. is cheaper, but these people don't have the benefit of the long-run. Again, you cannot fault people whose lives have been dependent on these sorts of jobs. The counterargument will of course be "well, they should've been better educated" or "they shouldn't have chosen that industry" or "they should learn a new skill for our economy"...well it isn't that simple, not everyone has the luxury of a great education and for many people, an education may mean not being able to put food on the table.

So...yes, we'd all like lower taxes, many government programs are severely flawed, but when you have a trillion dollar foreign policy as we do, it is simply not realistic (not in the short-run, at least). Also, Obama is not going to run into office and just start spending like mad on any damn program out there. He is a major proponent of Pay-as-you-Go and ensuring that money is used efficiently by our government. Flawed programs will be cut or fixed, good programs will get the funding they deserve.

Reagan has his strong points and some very weak points...War on Drugs, anyone?

The past few years we have seen the richest 1 percent gain the lions share of wealth, moreso than ever before in history. The top 100 wealthiest people are are worth something like the worlds poorest 2 billion. The middle class in America is shrinking, I dont think tax cuts for the middle class is a redistribution of wealth. It seems to be that Obama is realigning the tax system so that those who have less have the opportunity to pursue their dreams.

Anyone who talks about Obama carving out their wealth in an effort to redistribute wealth is simply wrong. Finance professionals know that opportunities to create wealth are far more prevalent once you already have it. I do not think its so bad that a president is offering tax cuts to the largest portion of America's electorate. These same people could use government guidance to get to the next rung of social hierarchy and are the driving force behind our entire economy.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html

Obama is going to 'give a man a fish', instead of 'teaching a man how to fish'

It's bullshit

wow, way to break it all down for us. thanks ard45 your clarity is supreme. if only someone like you could run for office we could all fish every fucking day.

TheKing: couldn't agree more.

America is behind Canada in terms of potential to succeed given any starting point.

To those that say "It's my money, I worked hard for it.": If you had lived in 99% of other countries around the world, your hard work would probably have landed you some shit blue collar job. You're lucky that your opportunities come on the backs of millions of other Americans, heck, the majority of the rest of the world. Sure, you don't have to care about anyone else, but you should at least recognize without them, your job wouldn't be so lucrative.

I'm with TheKing.

To add to this, one thing I never understood about this counterargument is, if NO ONE works these blue-collar jobs, then who will?

You're telling me that if EVERYONE in America gets an education, that there will be no more demand for steel/auto/manufacturing jobs? I find that hard to believe.

The original poster is 100% right. Obama will turn our nation into a socialist crap hole. He is indeed intent on giving out fish rather than teaching a man to fish.

As for those who think wealth redistribution is something that needs to be addressed...let me remind you that the government does not exist to make sure everyone has the same amount of money or earns equal amounts of money. That is not it's job. If you think so then you are badly mistaken and have grownup in an environment shielded from reality.

The point is that by paying people to fail you aren't helping them. And yes, no one in America would give two shits about manufacturing jobs if 100% of the population was college educated. We'd be perfectly content importing unskilled labor or the fruits of unskilled labor and exporting the fruits of our skilled labor.

To stay one step ahead of any lefties: Sorry, the government can't just pay for everyone's education. It's not that simple (even if some politician tells you it is).

[/quote]To stay one step ahead of any lefties: Sorry, the government can't just pay for everyone's education. It's not that simple (even if some politician tells you it is).[/quote]

? Many countries already have free college. e.g. Germany.
15.9M college/unvierstiy students x avg. public university tuition of 5k = 80Billion a year. Come on- 80 Billion is nothing when EVERY SINGLE college students does have the burden of tuition AT ALL.

Philosopher,

One thing to consider is the quality of the education. People pay outrageously large sums of money to obtain a degree from well-regarded private institutions rather than state schools. I can't imagine this trend stopping (take a look at private schools vs. public schools). There will still be a divide between Americans based on level of education.

~~~~~~~~~~~
CompBanker

Obama's philosophy on redistributing my wealth is just the completely wrong perspective. He claims he wants my employees to have the same opportunity that I have had to buy my own business. However he fails to remember that I have worked 10 years doing 10-12 hour days to get to this point.

One other sneaky thing that Obama is failing to tell you about is the 6.5% increase in taxes you will have from the lifting of the social security tax. Right now the cap is at 97k and this 6.5% increase while not technically federal withholding would take a large chunk out of my earnings.

Hes not getting my vote.

"Joe the plumber", get your blue-collar ass outta here
------------------------------------
"You know I look gangster in my pink polo"