A New Vision of an America in which Poverty is shared
Some children never really learn the difference between “my toys” and “someone else’s toys.”
Redistribution of wealth. Yeah, that should go over well.
Why doesn’t Obama start sharing his wealth?
And why does Michelle moan about not getting paid?
After it all shakes out and each level of government gets their turn at our paychecks, we’re already “sharing” a little over HALF of our “prosperity” as it is....
Is that NOT ENOUGH? For once(a debate would be a good place for this), I would just love it if someone would ask a liberal how high is high enough when it comes to our taxes. Where’s the limit as to how high they should go? I’m SURE we wouldn’t get a real answer to THAT question......
I heard the audio of Ubama saying this on the radio today. If those “moderate” cowards (Medved, I’m looking at you) who previously pooh-poohed the suggestion that this piece of dogsh** Ubama is a flat-out African communist still grimace when conservatives say it out loud, then they have their heads so far up their fat asses they can’t breathe.
Prosperity shared by those who do not work! Socialism at its best is being touted.
I would prefer to “share” my prosperity on my own terms, thank you very much Mr. Obama.
That will include such things as patronizing establishments of my own choice, buying products and services of my own choice, and giving to organizations and charities that share my values and promote goals I find worthy. Again all on my terms, and at my choice.
The notion that somehow government can do a better job of sharing my prosperity than I can myself is preposterous on its face.
But then, there isn’t much of Obama’s political thinking that I don’t find preposterous and essentially sophomoric.
The tragedy is that it was possible for such a clown to manage to be nominated by a major party and then worse, get elected. And then even worse, manage to STAY in office in the face of overwhelming evidence that he fails to meet minimum Constitutional qualifications for the office.
This says something very discouraging about out nation.
Do we go forward towards aThere is a law of physics - you know, the kind of thing your people wanted to repeal or just ignore when discussing plans for new Government Motors cars - which states that “matter can neither be created nor destroyed.”newstogy old vision of an America in which prosperity isshareddestroyed?But “prosperity” is not a thing, is not matter. Prosperity is the pursuit of happiness, and it is a process rather than a thing. As such, it can be prevented, just as the rights to life and liberty can be violated. But as Newt Gingrich put it, the Declaration of Independence did not say that anyone had the right to happiness itself, because happiness is not a thing which is in the gift of anyone to guarantee; there is such a thing as a Food Stamp, but there cannot be a Happiness Stamp which the government can print and make good on. Rich people can be unhappy.
In fact, believing in your own right to happiness is ironically a sure way to make yourself unhappy. You can only be happy in accordance with your ability to love and to give. The trouble with being a Socialist is that you become so eager to equalize happiness that you become, not a giver of happiness but a promoter of unhappiness.
Thankfulness is indispensable to happiness, and its opposite - envy - guarantees unhappiness. That is why “community organizing” can succeed and utterly fail at the same time. The people get things - even titles to houses - but cannot maintain themselves in a happy state in them. They got them through a process of envy, and cannot actually be thankful because they are convinced they had a “right” to them. And, being ungrateful, they remain as unhappy as ever.
Adam Smith said that we don’t look to the grocer to give us food out of the goodness of his heart, but because he gets a profit on the food he does provide. And yet, how can the grocer not also take satisfaction in the knowledge that he has provided us with sustenance and pleasure? The person who is not under the sway of the “community organizer” thanks the grocer as he walks away with his food even though he has paid for that food and is indisputably entitled to it. The person under sway of the “community organizer” is so obsessed with his rights that he must count his change obsessively and fret that an egg in one of his packages might be broken, or that the quality of the food may not be as good as what Bill Gates might have.
George Washington was a wealthy man. I think everyone should have as good a dental plan as he did. He had the best false teeth that money could buy - which wasn’t saying much. Today everyone in America, essentially, has better dental care than George Washington did. You may say, “Of course - the inevitable march of science has progressed far beyond the technology available in the Eighteenth Century.” Well, science and the useful arts certainly have progressed - but was it inevitable that the “useful arts” of dentistry for the ordinary person would progress so much? The “community organizer” assumes so, but the framers of the Constitution did not take that for granted. They made specific provision for the Patent Office to allow the people who improved dentistry to effectively claim credit for their inventions. The public, leaving the dentist’s office with sound teeth or, at worst, better dentures than George Washington could get, both pays money and thanks the dentist (and hopes not to need more dental work in the future).
Americans today find it hard to relate to the behavior of wealthy Southerners before the Civil War. And yet, in historical retrospect, slavery was an institution which was accepted worldwide and throughout history up until the Eighteenth Century. Not just, not even especially, Christians had slaves. Southern slavery was maintained by Christians with rifles - and was overturned by Christians with rifles. Slavery was abolished, not just in the South but essentially worldwide, by Christians with rifles and influence. It was not done by atheists - slavery was important in the Soviet Union and other Communist countries, for example - and it was not done by Muslims or Hindus or Buddhists or any other culture. It was done by Christians. And the ideology behind the Declaration of Independence - the concept that people have inherent rights which are transcendent - lies at the root of that great progress.
The southerners who owned multiple slaves (including George Washington and other founders) were undoubtedly rich by the standards of the time. But none of them were as rich as Queen Victoria (1820-1901). And an American secretary today has so much better health and dental care (for herself and her family), and so much better transportation and so many electrical and electronic conveniences and amusements, than Queen Victoria that the secretary is arguably better off than the queen was. The plantation owners of the South aren’t even in the running.
So let us hear no more of the conceit that American free enterprise “has never worked” for Americans, and that a “new” vision of government’s somehow enslaving the wealthy for the benefit of the “poor” (whose physical conditions are better than that of most people in Asia today) offers hope. Hope, in the secular sense, is not that doctors and other valuable professionals will be forced to work for less money. Hope lies in the progress of science and the useful arts, applied to making medical care better, not making the medical profession work cheaper.
The community organizer demands “more,” and more is never enough to produce happiness. America asks for, and gratefully accepts, better instead. Better health care for ourselves, even far better than that for our children and grandchildren. We were bequeathed that legacy by our forefathers, and we are unwilling that we should fail to bequeath the same legacy to posterity.
“Do we go forward towards a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared?”
“we” = government
“forward” = everywhere
“vision” = agenda
“prosperity” = mediocrity
“shared” = relinquished
More and more, Obama is sounding like Lenin without the originality.
Four more years of Obama’s half-baked communalism (for the benefit of Blacks, illegal aliens and union members only), and America will look like a cross between Russia and the Central African Republic.
Why doesnt he just say we all want to share the Wealth Like they do in Cuba,Venezuela,Mexico,North Korea,Russia,China.
Come on Barry let it all Out
Democrats had the same dream - that prosperity be shared, back in 1860. They wanted others to do the work while they reaped the rewards of that labor. Seems that they want the same now.
FREEDOM v Free Stuff
Isn’t this sweet? Coming from Obama, who only donates 1% of his entitlement salary to charity. Whose own half brother lives in a slum. Whose aunt lives in public housing and on welfare? Whose uncle works a liquor store awaiting deportation.
His statement of moving forward to shared prosperity sounds like looters dividing the spoils