Obama Administration To Attempt Another Socialist Power Grab

You know, I have a question for all the hard-core Democrats that keep stamping their feet and insisting that Obama is not a socialist: Why does Obama insist on proposing socialist policies which enhance his power over the free market? I have yet to see any Democrat answer that question.

Here is Obama’s latest attempt at a socialist power grab according to the Los Angeles Times:

The Obama administration this week will propose the most significant new regulation of the financial industry since the Great Depression, including a new watchdog agency to look out for consumers’ interests. Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would have new powers to seize key companies — such as insurance giant American International Group Inc. — whose failure jeopardizes the financial system. Currently, the government’s authority to seize companies is mostly limited to banks.

The government shouldn’t have the power to seize anything and this latest attempt by Obama to grab more power for himself over the means of production should serve as the final straw for any true freedom loving American.

But it isn’t just Obama. Other Democrats wanted this measure earlier and with more power:

“This is too little, too late,” said Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks), based on his understanding of the plan. “It’s going to be way less than it should be.”

We have to wake up! From my history lessons, I remember two prominent socialist movements who seized the means of production in their respective countries and they both ended in disaster, one in utter defeat in 1945 and the other finally fell under its own weight in 1991.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Obama To Propose Strict New Regulation Of Financial Industry
Jim Puzzanghera
Los Angeles Times
June 16, 2009

As The Nation’s Workforce Suffers, Government’s Thrives

There are basically two camps in the debate about how to stimulate an economy. On the one hand you have the capitalists who hold that economies are driven by the private sector and that it is most important for the people to have money to spend. On the other hand you have the socialists who think that government spending drives an economy and that it is more important for the government to raise taxes in order to have money to spend.

Right now, the socialists are in power and they are doing everything they can to implement their agenda no matter how disastrous it may be.

Writing for Publius Forum, Warner Todd Huston looks at what is happening in the private sector versus how the Federal government is growing:

Our stern and earnest president told us that it is time for Americans to sacrifice. Gone are the good times, he’s told us. We are in for austere days, he says. Sacrifice, people, sacrifice. That is the word of the day. Well, it’s the word for we commoners, anyway. For if you happen to be looking at government don’t expect to find any “sacrifice” going on at any level. In fact, government seems to be a boom business under the president of change and “sacrifice.”

There is no sacrifice at the Federal level. Government workers can see their pay increase from an average of $72,800 in 2008 to $75,419 in 2009. And as one who lives in the D.C. area, I can honestly tell you that for that money, we taxpayers are getting very little in return.

Warner even quotes from CBS News to show how fast the Federal government is growing:

Some of the Feds’ hiring increases have been stunning. If you look at the four-year period from 2006 to 2010, the number of Homeland Security employees has grown by 22 percent, the Justice Department has increased by 15 percent, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can claim 25 percent more employees. (These figures assume that Congress adopts Mr. Obama’s 2010 budget without significant changes.)

Now, those of us in the private sector are struggling and we pray on a daily basis that we will still have a job tomorrow. Out pay raises haven’t been anything like the Federal workers are getting. Where is the government getting the money from to pay for those raises? Taxes. Tax money that if left in the private sector would do more to grow our economy than any bloated government would ever be able to do. The tax money the Feds confiscate to give out pay raises to government employees could very well have been money that employers could have used to give private sector employees bigger pay raises.

Keep in mind that the only region of the nation that benefits from higher taxes is the Washington D.C. Metro area and parts of Northern Virginia and Southern/Central Maryland. The rest of the nation suffers economic decline.

Warner’s parting shot:

What we see here is that President Obama is not helping the economy at all. He is helping inflate the power of government. And, since government is only a drag on the economy, he is making matter far worse than they were. What we have here with this perpetual Obama political campaign is not a president that is a savior of the economy, but one that is the patron saint of the expansion of big government.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

As The Nation’s Workforce Suffers, Government’s Thrives
Warner Todd Huston
Publius Forum
May 19, 2009

The Prediction Of Norman Mattoon Thomas Is Coming True

Just read the following:

Today, even the most socialist Dems will still deny that their policies and the policies of Barack Obama are socialist.

Thomas was right. We Americans will never “knowingly” adopt socialism.

Are you ready to wake up yet?

JB Williams: America Largely Silent While Obama Destroys The Nation

I can’t disagree with the title here. I see it everywhere. I see it on television. I see it in the retail stores. I see it on the Internet. There are a great many people who seem to simply not care about what is happening to their own nation.

I’m certain there were similar attitudes in Germany when the Nazis took over. (In fact, having read Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich by William L. Shirer, I am absolutely sure that such attitudes existed.) I am also certain that similar attitudes were held by the average Russian after Stalin siezed power.

That is why it scares me to see the same attitudes here in the United States while the Obama administration installs more socialist policies for which the response from the media and a majority of Americans has been nothing but silence, which Obama and his socialist cronies will take as tacet approval.

Writing for Capitol Hill Coffee House, J.B. Williams has the following observations:

Obamanation has taken the nation from a trillion in debt to over $4 trillion in debt in the first sixty days, with even more federal spending promised, which could put the nation $10 trillion in debt before the 2010 mid-term election cycle. Amnesty for illegals and ACORN led redistricting will make 2010 and beyond a moot point.

Now, Obama likes to use the excuse that he “inherited” this debt. Only up to a point. The quadrupling of the debt is entirely his fault as well as the fault of the Democrats who voted to go along with it.

Now here is where we have to wonder at the silence. If a trillion dollar debt is bad, then why would the Democrats consider a 4 trillion dollar debt to be better? Shouldn’t it be four times worse? Where is the outrage at how Obama and the Democrats are threatening to squander our children’s and grandchildren’s future?

More:

Old concepts have been redefined. Capitalism is now referred to as Fascism. Personal ambition is now called greed. Those who seek access to other people’s rightful earnings are called charitable, and those who demand a right to only that, which they earn, are called greedy. It isn’t just the words that have new definitions. The concepts have new meaning as a result. Words like socialism and communism no longer have a negative connotation attached to them. Most Americans have no idea what they are anymore, or why they don’t want to find out the hard way. The concept of liberal interpretations limits the meaning of words only to one’s individual imagination. The Constitution means only what someone imagines it to mean. If the shoe doesn’t quite fit, a new definition will solve the problem.

We’ve seen Timothy Geithner ask, in the name of Obama, for the power to go in and take over any private sector entity he deems necessary. (I can see how that power can be abused simply to destroy political enemies.) We’ve seen how Obama wants to control the auto industry by forcing out the CEO of General Motors despite the fact that the only thing Obama or any other government official would only be able to do is drive GM further into the ground.

This is socialism, folks! And it has been a disaster everywhere it has been tried. We do not need to relearn this lesson the hard way. We simply need to crack open some history books and read. Read how the Nazis (National Socialists) drove Germany into the ground. Read how the communists drove Russia and Eastern Europe into the ground. Read how socialism is driving Europe into the ground right now.

What will it take?

Nobody knows for how long or at what expense, but so far, the people remain silent and Washington continues to profitably interpret that silence as broad-based consent. At this late date, I have no idea what will wake up the average American or how they might react once finally awake and ready to engage in self-governance. However, I am sure about two things… * When they finally do awake, they are going to be really angry… * And, the anti-American left won’t let up until then… The clock isn’t just ticking. Time has already run out as of the 2008 election. Washington DC is currently dismantling America, individual right by individual right, in an unprecedented massive multi-faceted assault on all things American.

I see the dangers and know the lessons of history.

Do you?

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Americans Largely Silent As Their Nation Is Systematically Destroyed
JB Williams
Capitol Hill Coffee House
March 25, 3009

Obama’s Deception: Keep The Economic Crisis Going While Pushing Through A Radical Agenda

Back in the 70′s, 80′s and 90′s, William F. Buckley was considered to be the best political writer on the scene. Now that Buckley is gone and his own son has renounced whatever birthright he was entitled to, Charles Krauthammer has become the premier political pundit of the day.

Krauthammer has penned another awesome essay that is so simply stated and so heavy-hitting that it must be reprinted far and wide.

His latest column deals with Obama’s claims about the causes of the current financial crisis and the cures. I don’t think any other columnist has looked at the issue this way and certainly no left-leaning columnist would even think these things.

From Real Clear Politics;

“Our economy did not fall into decline overnight,” [Obama] averred. Indeed, it all began before the housing crisis. What did we do wrong? We are paying for past sins in three principal areas: energy, health care, and education — importing too much oil and not finding new sources of energy (as in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf?), not reforming health care, and tolerating too many bad schools. The “day of reckoning” has now arrived. And because “it is only by understanding how we arrived at this moment that we’ll be able to lift ourselves out of this predicament,” Obama has come to redeem us with his far-seeing program of universal, heavily nationalized health care; a cap-and-trade tax on energy; and a major federalization of education with universal access to college as the goal.

Obama seems to be blaming the economic crisis on the absence of three things: socialized health care, an economy crushing energy tax and a free college education for everyone.

But, Obama either doesn’t understand the true cause of the economic conditions we now live under or he is deliberately ignoring those causes.

More:

At the very center of our economic near-depression is a credit bubble, a housing collapse and a systemic failure of the entire banking system. One can come up with a host of causes: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed by Washington (and greed) into improvident loans, corrupted bond-ratings agencies, insufficient regulation of new and exotic debt instruments, the easy money policy of Alan Greenspan’s Fed, irresponsible bankers pushing (and then unloading in packaged loan instruments) highly dubious mortgages, greedy house-flippers, deceitful homebuyers.

And here is the stroke of insightful genious that is Charles Krauthammer:

The list is long. But the list of causes of the collapse of the financial system does not include the absence of universal health care, let alone of computerized medical records. Nor the absence of an industry-killing cap-and-trade carbon levy. Nor the lack of college graduates. Indeed, one could perversely make the case that, if anything, the proliferation of overeducated, Gucci-wearing, smart-ass MBAs inventing ever more sophisticated and opaque mathematical models and debt instruments helped get us into this credit catastrophe in the first place. And yet with our financial house on fire, Obama makes clear both in his speech and his budget that the essence of his presidency will be the transformation of health care, education and energy. Four months after winning the election, six weeks after his swearing in, Obama has yet to unveil a plan to deal with the banking crisis.

Exactly! Obama and his socialist cronies are more than willing to allow the banking crisis to continue so that they will always have a continuous excuse to enact more socialist policies that will allow the government to take more control of our lives. Obama has plans for socializing just about everything, but has absolutely no plan to resolve the economic problems that are most pressing to the American people.

Either Obama is completely clueless about the economy, or he knows it all too well and is deliberately using it to push through a radical agenda.

Wake up, America! If we let this go too far, we will be in the same dire straits as Europe and will have no way of getting out of it any time soon.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Deception At Core Of Obama Plans
Charles Krauthammer
Real Clear Politics
March 6, 2009

How The Bailouts Are Faring In Europe

Let’s see, the bailout of the banks has failed. The two bailouts of Detroit have both failed. The massive porkulus/spendulus package that was supposed to inject confidence in the economy has failed. How many more failures do we need to see before we realize that socialism is the worng way to go?

If not here in the U.S., then look at Europe. Rachel Marsden has an excellent column for Town Hall.

Here are some excerpts:

Hungary and the Baltic states want to be bailed out by countries like France and Germany, which are having enough financial troubles of their own. Le Figaro newspaper reports that France’s debt is heading for 80% of its GDP (or $27,625 US per person) by the end of next year. France pumped $450 billion US into its banks last year, and another $7.8 billion to prop up French car manufacturers – because the world would be lost without Renaults and Citroens. Germany bailed out its banks last October to the tune of $675 billion US. And now the crippled are being asked to carry the wounded with a massive transfer of wealth.

It didn’t work in Europe and it certainly won’t work here in the U.S.

More:

So far, the consensus is to deal with such bailouts of entire countries on a case-by-case basis. Hopefully, that means never. Argentina has been digging itself out of bankruptcy for the past few years, and will perhaps one day figure out that socialism doesn’t work. In the meantime, other countries can use the lesson: You can’t keep pouring money into a socialist society when there’s no production occurring to create the wealth you’re spending pre-emptively.

That is what socialists don’t understand. Socialism destroys the means of production which in turn destroys wealth. The big mistake that socialists make is that they think the main social goal of businesses is to create jobs. That is wrong. The main social goal of businesses is to turn a profit and from that profit new jobs will be created. That’s why higher taxes lead to higher unemployment. Taxes reduce the profit of a business.

Finally:

Now, you might be asking yourself, “Why should I care, as an American?” Well, because President Obama is intent on spreading the misery of this crisis, and it’s unclear at this point how far across borders that misery will reach, or whether we’re looking at some kind of a new economic Marshall Plan to help out Europe. He’s already being prodded in that regard by UK PM Gordon Brown who, like Obama, is tossing money at make-work government projects and, unlike Obama, is facing a toss right out of office as a result. It would represent yet another failure of Obama-style socialism. … Perhaps I can put this in terms that some Brits can understand: Never before has the detriment of giving a socialist more money to piss up a wall been so glaringly evident.

Gotta love that parting shot.

You can access the complete columnn on-line here:

Hang On To Your Wallets, Here Comes The EU!
Rachel Marsden
TownHall.com
March 5, 2009

Congress Porks Out … Again!

You would think that after the experience with the porkulus/spendulus bill, which enjoyed a favorable rating of over 50% until details of the pork and earmarks attached to it became available after which support fell to barely 37%, that Congress would get the message that we Americans don’t want our hard-earned money to be confiscated away and then given to some pet project that doesn’t benefit us at all.

But, members of Congress (both Democrat and Republican) seem to never learn. According to the New York Post:

Congress went on a pork-a-palooza yesterday, approving a massive spending bill with big bucks for Hawaiian canoe trips, research into pig smells, and tattoo removal – all while the nation faces an economic crisis.

Clearly, they have not learned. But this isn’t all:

The bill also has a whopping 8 percent increase over last year for the numerous federal agencies it funds.

Let’s see, the Obama administration has absolutely no clue as to how it is going to provide oversight for the porkulus/spendulus funding towards the Federal Government and Congress is increasing that money already?

And the fact that 40% of this pork came from Republican lawmakers is not good at all. I hope Michael Steele is paying attention so he knows who not to back in the 2010 elections.

More:

The bill, which critics slammed as larded with pork, has big bucks to combat putrid stenches in the heartland, with $1.7 million for “Swine Odor and Manure Management Research.” That’s on top of $1.9 million in each of the last two years, or nearly $6 million over the last three years. The swine research center, at Iowa State University in Ames, got funds through the Agricultural Research Service, and aims to improve the smell of animals and the lagoons where waste is stored.

Well, God knows we can’t live without knowing all there is to know about the smells that come from pigs, now can we?

And this little tidbit, I thought was most telling:

Obama has criticized earmarks and insisted they be kept out of stimulus legislation – a suggestion that drew laughs from Republicans at the president’s address to Congress Tuesday night. … Meanwhile, Obama is set to unveil a proposal today that sets aside $634 billion over the next 10 years for health-care reform. He plans to pay for it, in part, by capping tax deductions for families that earn more than $250,000 a year.

More socialism that we cannot afford, on top of the pork that we cannot afford.

And Obama’s comment on earmarks? Whom does he think he is kidding? Why did he bother to say anything about that when it is clear to everyone that he has no intention of ever enforcing such a policy?

Obama and Congress are spending our money like drunken sailors on shore-leave. The only thing they will accomplish is destroy an already fragile economy and bankrupt future generations who will have to pay the bill for all of this fiscal foolishness.

It is time we remembered what Margaret Thatcher said: “The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” The way Obama and Congress are spending, that day will be coming much sooner than later.

Obama and congress seem to have no problem spending our money, but I am sure that they take care of themselves pretty well.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

Congress’ Porky Pols Pig Out On Fine $wine
Geoff Earle and Daphne Retter
New York Post
February 26, 2009

Dr. James Hansen Admits The True Goal Of Global Warming Alarmists: Socialist Redistribution Of Wealth

They say there are two kinds of intelligence: Book smarts and Street smarts. Book smarts are good when you are trying to make a better living through self-improvment. Street smarts are essential when you want to live in the real world rather than some impossible-to-achieve fantasy world.

Dr. James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies is the perfect example of someone who has book smarts, but has almost no street smarts whatsoever.

As evidence, I present a letter that Dr. Hansen wrote to Barack Obama in which he tells Obama how to use the Global Warming Hoax as a means to implement a socialist policy of wealth redistribution.

This isn’t a joke. He wants a “carbon tax” on petroleum products believeing that such will encourage Americans to “move beyond fossil fuels.” Here are some excerpts from his letter:

The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels.

Any first year economics student will be able to tell you that the “appropriate effect” will be artificial price increases all across the board. In other words, anything that uses fossil fuels to get from the producer to the consumer will go up in price. Gas, oil, food, clothing, construction costs, infrastructure costs, public services costs, etc. Everyone will be paying higher prices.

How does Hansen think the public will respond?

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend.

First, if Hansen honestly believes that Washington would enact any kind of tax without creating bureaucratic positions to oversee such a tax, then he really has no street smarts at all.

Second, why does it have a maximum share for two children? Is this Hansen’s way of telling people how many children they are allowed to have? A way of implementing dictatorial population control?

Third, another thing that Hansen doesn’t realize is that the ultimate effect of his proposal would be to subsidize the American people for paying higher fuel prices. In other words, force higher prices by enacting a tax, and then redistributing the tax proceeds so that people can turn around and pay the higher prices. There is no net gain there at all and nothing gets done. Money simply passes from one set of hands to the other and there is absolutely no productive result to show for the transfer.

And another point that shows how out of touch Hansen is with reality is that he actually makes the claim that paying higher fuel prices (and all other inflationary costs that result from such higher prices) would stimulate the economy!

Here is what he has to say about that:

A carbon tax is honest, clear and effective. It will increase energy prices, but low and middle income people, especially, will find ways to reduce carbon emissions so as to come out ahead.

Yeah, let’s look at that one for a minute. What would low and middle income people do when costs increase but their paychecks remain the same? They cut back. They cut back on food purchases. They cut back on anything that involves transporting the kids. They cut back on shopping. They cut back on educational resources. They cut back on their recreational activities. They cut back on whatever vacation trips they had planned. In short, they cut back on anything that is affected by the artificial price increase that this lunatic tax would cause.

Again, as any first year economics student will tell you, the net result of all these cut backs is to cause the economy to shrink, but Hansen has completely deluded himself into believing that it will cause the economy to grow!

I don’t know of any rationally thinking person who would agree that any of this would be good for low and middle income people.

The Greenhouse Effect Theory and its Anthropogenic Global Warming fellow travelers have been shown to be hoaxes by legitimate scientists as we see average global temperatures drop and record snowfalls thorughout the world. Now we know why the hoax is being perpetuated. Socialists like James Hansen are trying to convince socialists like Barack Obama to use the hoax as a power play for themselves and further wreck our economies as well as the dreams of low and middle income Americans.

This carbon tax is easily one of the most idiotic fantasies ever to be floated in political circles.

Also, proposals like this are a prime example of why Michael Crichton was so firm in his commitment to keeping politics and science completely separate.

You can access the original letter on-line here:

Hansen’s Insane Proposal Published At Columbia University
Dr. James Hansen

And here is another blog entry regarding James Hansen’s crackpot claims:

Dr. James Hansen Gets It Wrong Again
84rules
November 17, 2008

Barack Obama’s Plan To Force Socialism On The United States, Even Though We Don’t Want It

84%. That’s how many Americans think that the Marxist philosophy of “redistributing the wealth” is wrong. Thus, even if Barack Obama wins next week, he will run into a wall of opposition from the American people. So, what will he do about it?

Simple. He will stack the courts.

Steven G. Calabresi over at the Wall Street Journal has penned a great column and shows us exactly how Obama plans to do it. With a possible four Supreme Court appointments, Obama would certainly appoint socialists and other extreme leftists to the High Court. That will be majorly bad news for America since it would mean a permanent socialist government from which we may never escape and any attempts to remove such a government could be struck down by Obama’s socialist judges. (I can say this with a straight face because Europe, despite the troubles they have faced, have never been able to get rid of the socialism that they are shackled under for the same reason.)

From Mr. Calabresi’s column:

Speaking in July 2007 at a conference of Planned Parenthood, he said: “[W]e need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.” On this view, plaintiffs should usually win against defendants in civil cases; criminals in cases against the police; consumers, employees and stockholders in suits brought against corporations; and citizens in suits brought against the government. Empathy, not justice, ought to be the mission of the federal courts, and the redistribution of wealth should be their mantra.

And here we are, back to redistribution of the wealth, an idea that only brought disaster to the economies of any nation that has ever tried it.

And it wasn’t just his comment to Joe the Plumber. Obama had designs on socialist intervention long before that:

In a Sept. 6, 2001, interview with Chicago Public Radio station WBEZ-FM, Mr. Obama noted that the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren “never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society,” and “to that extent as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical.” He also noted that the Court “didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted.” That is to say, he noted that the U.S. Constitution as written is only a guarantee of negative liberties from government — and not an entitlement to a right to welfare or economic justice.

The prospect of a socialist presidency should scare everybody. In his misguided attempts to bring about “social economics” to the poor, Obama is going to hurt them even more. By taking money away from those who pay the wages, those who work for the wages will be hurt. He may be giving away $1000 checks to those wage earners in exchange for their vote, but that won’t make up for the jobs that wage earners will lose under a cruching tax increase.

And for those of you who don’t believe that history can repeat itself:

A whole generation of Americans has come of age since the nation experienced the bad judicial appointments and foolish economic and regulatory policy of the Johnson and Carter administrations. If Mr. Obama wins we could possibly see any or all of the following: a federal constitutional right to welfare; a federal constitutional mandate of affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent; a right for government-financed abortions through the third trimester of pregnancy; the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants; ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors; and approval of huge punitive damage awards, like those imposed against tobacco companies, against many legitimate businesses such as those selling fattening food.

It happened under Carter, and will be even worse under Obama.

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Obama’s ‘Redistribution’ Constitution
Steven G. Calabresi
The Wall Street Journal
October 28, 2008

Barack Obama’s Socialist Agenda Revealed By His Own Words

I’ve known for a long time that Barack Obama and the vast majority of Democrats in this country are socialists. It’s in their policies, it’s in their rhetoric and it’s in their anti-American stances.

But, Barack Obama finally made that admission in no uncertain terms when he answered a question this past weekend from a small business owner, a man who happens to be a plumber in Ohio. Here is a transcript of what transpired:

“Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it?” the plumber asked, complaining that he was being taxed “more and more for fulfilling the American dream.” “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too,” Obama responded. “My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody … I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

So, Obama wants to take money away from the people who earned it and give it to people who didn’t earn it. That’s it. That’s his whole economic plan in a nutshell and he even admitted to it. Look at his words: “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” That is a one-hundred percent endorsement for wealth redistribution a la Karl Marx.

Punishing people for being successful is precisely what socialists do because it discourages success. Obama says he wants everyone to have a “chance for success?” Why work to succeed if the government is only going to tax away the fruit of your hard work?

This leads to a very important question that Dr. Bobby Eberle asks:

Does Obama really understand the essence of America? It is strong because of the American spirit of invention and the bravery to undertake new endeavors. Those at the economic bottom DO NOT create jobs. Those at the economic bottom get hired for jobs. When the economy is robust, more jobs are created, thus more people get hired. There’s not a business existing in America today that doesn’t want to “do more business.” In order to grow, more workers must be hired, and more capital purchased… both of which benefit the economy. Doesn’t Obama understand this??? Let’s just do a little simple math to see how taxes really work. Let’s say there is a person making $50,000/year and paying 15% in federal income tax. Thus, the person’s yearly tax burden is $7,500. If someone making $1,000,000/year paid at the same tax rate, they would pay $150,000 in taxes. So, the person making $50,000 pays $7,500, and the person making a million pays $150,000. Those who make more money, pay more in taxes. It’s only logical.

But, since Barack Obama and the Dems are socialists, let’s look at the way they try to twist the economy to their own benefit:

However, that is not how a socialist thinks. Rather than each person truly paying “their fair share,” the socialist says that the “rich” person should not only pay more because he or she makes more, but they should also pay a higher percentage. So, the person making $1,000,000/year instead pays 35% in taxes for a tax bill of $350,000. That’s an extra $200,000 that the government takes out of circulation to pay for their social engineering.

Now, that’s $200,000 that will be taken out of the general economy which means it will not be used for capital investment nor for creating jobs. It will simply be squandered on some government hand-out program which does nothing more than reward able-bodied people for not working. In other words, the people who work to earn and produce will be supporting the people who sit back and live off of the government dole.

That’s the socialists’ dream. Get as many people on the dole as possible and then buy off their votes with more welfare checks. Of course every government that has tried this ended up with an enduring unemployment rate of anywhere between 10 and 20%. That too seems to be the vision Obama has for America.

Are you listening?

You can access the complete column on-line here:

Obama’s Socialist Agenda — Is Anyone Listening?
Dr. Bobby Eberle
GOPUSA.com
October 14, 2008