|
|
|
| |
|
Comments"Fairness". How is it fair that I work, and the government gives a portion of MY earnings to someone else? They didn't work for that money, I did. This is absolute equine excreta. I have always thought so. If I need unemployment insurance, those funds that the government has taken from me should have been put in an account with MY name on it for me to take a portion of to survive until my next job."I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I shall never live for another, nor ask another to live for me." Not exact, but close. Posted by cmblake6 on 04/16 at 05:47 AM | # How do we know this scheme is in fact for income redistribution? Because Obama says it isn't! "these investments haven’t been made as some grand scheme to redistribute wealth". O great Quisling, from whom all dreams of a fractured, ineffective United States flow, tell us: where did you first get the idea to call "tax and spend", "investment"? Hmmm? Posted by welldoneson on 04/14 at 04:02 AM | # As a older foreign born AMERICAN citizen, I have puzzled for years over the question of why Europe embraces socialism and left leaning ideas. Especially after WWII. The answer came to me in an "I could have had a V8" moment. The history of Europe is Kings, Queens and dictators. They have always looked to someone else to wipe their noses. Posted by mkb44 on 04/13 at 09:06 PM | # How about this for redistribution of wealth: The government spent at least $205,075 in 2010 to move ONE bush (Yes, that is correct! That was for moving ONE bush) in San Francisco that stood in the path of a $1.045-billion highway-renovation project that was partially funded by the economic stimulus legislation President Barack Obama signed in 2009. The charge in this area for moving a rather large tree is $150.00. Using the Obama redistribution of wealth formula, my wife and I did about $750,000.00 worth of transplanting yesterday. And that work we did should also get an “old fogie” bonus so that would come to about 1 Million dollars. Oh shucks, I forgot! We are not union members or have a special skin color so we don’t qualify. Must be my old age senility setting in when I forgot the qualifying “credentials”. But then again, we are a minority in that less than 1/2 of 1% of the people are our age. (Old fogies never die, they forgot how to). Under Obamanable Care we have 179 new agencies so far. How’s that for a nice size voting block paid for by you and me? Posted by JohnMinn on 04/13 at 06:46 PM | # My blood pressure climbs whenever governments want to use more of our earnings. I am never surprised by how it is justified and made to seem righteous and good. Great spin doctors and slogan writers get it done every time. It is nothing new and been done to the public through the ages. There are all kinds of socially subsidized taxes being used without clear accountability and oversight. Policing Firefighting Public Education Military Farm Subsidies Roads, Highways, Transportation Welfare, Pensions (there's plenty more) I think there is necessity for these functions, but they have become taxpayer "black holes" that aren't held to account for the huge portion of our taxes that get eaten up without much whimpering. Socialism seeds have been in our society since it began. When do we hold all this government manipulation to account? How much socialism is enough? Why can't communities take care of their own without all this money grabbing? Dean Posted by Dean Currie on 04/13 at 05:37 PM | # I notice that Pres Obama would like to distribute even more of my meager income to people who make no attempt at self reliance. I would like to be wealthy, however, I do not fit that mold. In spite of that Pres Obama's plan would take even more of my livelihood in taxes so that those who have less can enjoy the fruits of capitalism. I can only imagine how a truly wealthy person would feel. 'Investments' by government in anything has proven to be inefficient at best. Government investment in education, research and healthcare, important at face value, become more a method of control than a means of lifting citizens, not to mention non-citizens, out of poverty. Simply pouring governmental funds, funds taken from the well to do, into programs to benefit the less wealthy quickly becomes a means of control rather than an upward path in society. Posted by Robert Fanning on 04/13 at 01:39 PM | # Obama and Redistribution of Your WealthPosted by Joseph Harris on Apr 13, 2012 at 11:29 PM
Fairness is the vehicle Obama uses to implement socialism In a speech earlier this week (April 10), President Obama said the following: “So these investments — in things like education and research and health care — they haven’t been made as some grand scheme to redistribute wealth from one group to another…this is not some socialist dream.” More...Post a Comment on: Obama and Redistribution of Your WealthCommenting is not available in this channel entry. Next entries comments: Strike Two for Marlin Manager Ozzie Guillen Previous entries comments: Inflation’s worse curse Note from the Editor: This section is for comments from readers of canadafreepress.com. Please don't assume that Canada Free Press agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege. |
|
