2001 Obamarxism

DRUDGE:

Barack Obama on Chicago Public Radio WBEZ-FM, 2001: The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society... and one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that... DEVELOPING...

Why do Obama and his supporters imagine that the United States will have more success with income redistribution than the Soviets had?

I have said before that people like me are bad for the economy. I would rather stay home with my wife and children than find a full-time job that would take me away from them as well as part-time teaching.

The problem with income redistribution is that it encourages people like me to do what we are doing but discourages people making more money from working any more than they have to. Now, such a condition might well prove good for them (just as my leaving the rat race has proven good for me), but I don't see how the economy is going to do well as the investor class stops investing as there is a limit on how much they can make.

One piece of data that I have not yet seen is how much the taxes are to be raised on people making more than 250K per year. If it is just to go back to previous levels, then I wonder how the government will be able to pay for Obama's ideas that had not been implemented under Clinton.

The next two years are going to be a fascinating study of what happens when people with great rhetoric have to actually govern a nation. When unemployment ends up in 2010 twice what it was in 2006, I wonder how they will spin the matter. Must somehow still be Bush's fault, I'm sure.

Why do Obama and his supporters imagine that the United States will have more success with income redistribution than the Soviets had?

Maybe because for almost a hundred years it has been more successful in the United States than in the USSR.

You can think Frank that what we've done over the past ~75 years (we didn't have socialist practices before FDR Frank) is comparable to what Reid, Pelosi and Obama (I put them first because in all honesty, he's a mere puppet, a figure head that signs their bills) but nothing could be further from the truth.

While we have had socialist programs, they've hardly been successful as Medicare, medicade, welfare and SSI are some of the most fraudulent and wasteful programs going. The Hertitage Foundation estimates (conservatively imo) that Medicare alone waste $20 to $30 Billion/year and that's one program.

When you add all that Barrack Obama wants to do, he's proposed increasing current spending by $400 Billion dollars, combined with current economic conditions, our fate will be the same as the USSR's was in the late 80's.

The bad part about the collapse of the richest nation in history is that it will be a slow, painful process that politicians will attempt to prop up with increased taxes upon increased taxes with no cuts for years to come. And when cuts do occur, it will be in military spending and self defense, the cornerstone of our Constitution, not entitlement spending so the only question that will remain is, will be overtaken by a hostile country or will we bankrupt ourselves?

While you might not care, I do.

ziggy wrote:

Why do Obama and his supporters imagine that the United States will have more success with income redistribution than the Soviets had?

Maybe because for almost a hundred years it has been more successful in the United States than in the USSR.

Perhaps in that it has been less extreme.

The basic principle of people eating, getting health care, and having a place to live is one that I endorse wholeheartedly. If there is real accountability, I don't at all mind sharing what I have.

My fear is that we'll have a situation in which the government wastes money, people are encouraged not to work, and people we need to be working stop as they've hit a certain point where it no longer behooves them to do so.

I don't know if all my wants can be met in policy, but I'd like to see someone try.

Well, I'm glad to see that Obama at least rejected court-mandated "redistribution." He seems to support redistribution through legislative processes, which is more defensible (although of course I still oppose it).

Income Redistribution: Businessman gives gratuity of waiter wearing Obama tie to homeless guy
Charlestonwatch.com ^ | October 27, 2008 | Lee Walton

Last Thursday while walking to lunch on the corner of Market and East Bay, I passed what appeared to be a homeless man standing on the corner of Wentworth and East Bay holding a hand-made sign that read, “Vote Obama, I need the money.”, I laughed to myself and admired the man for his misplaced, albeit blatant honesty.

Once inside one of my favorite restaurants, I noticed that my waiter was wearing a bright blue ,“Obama 08” tie; again I laughed to myself as he boldly and proudly advertised his political preference for all the world, and his customers, to see -- just imagine the odds of encountering two such 1st Amendment harbingers of change in less than 10-minutes.

When the check finally came I decided not to tip my waiter and explained to him that I was going to implement a practical application of Obama's Redistribution of Wealth concept as my own personal socialistic experiment. He stood there in stoic disbelief as I explained to him that I was going to redistribute his rightfully earned $10 tip to someone who I deemed more in need...a homeless fellow standing a few blocks north in front of the Harris Teeter parking lot.

(Excerpt) Read more at charlestonwatch.com ...