In his address to the nation about massive budget deficits and the skyrocketing national debt at George Washington University, President Obama blasted Republican budget reform proposals and announced his plan for solving the budget deficit which could basically be summed up like this: Tax the rich people because they should bear "a greater share of this burden."
President Obama's speech, employing his usual class warfare rhetoric, painted a portrait of two Americas, two competing ideologies and two different visions for the nation's future; one that exalts individualism and prosperity and one that punishes it. As Obama said emphatically in his speech, his battle is "about changing the basic social compact in America."
His vision of a government taking ever-more from its productive citizens, then acting as a kind of national conscience and clearinghouse that decides who should get the spoils, is chilling and perhaps the most brazen display of President Obama's progressive ideological orthodoxy yet. In contrast, a more preferable vision for American life is one of individual initiative and self-responsibility, of voluntary participation in our community life, and of voluntary contributions of time and money to our fellow citizens in need.
"From our first days as a nation," he said during his speech, "we have put our faith in free markets and free enterprise as the engine of America's wealth and prosperity." He went on "we are a self-reliant people with a healthy skepticism of too much government." But almost dismissive of that part of American tradition he added "there has always been another thread running throughout our history "“ a belief that we are all connected; and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation."
Obama's collectivist viewpoint and plan for "shared sacrifice" merely shift the burden to a subset of Americans. His plan is to tax those he defines as "?rich people' and further complicate an already abhorrent tax code by "limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2% of Americans""”another attempt to divide the country based on economic status and enhance government revenues. If he wanted real reforms to the tax code the administration might look to flat tax proposals.
Facing a budget deficit this year of $1.65 trillion and national debt of $14.3 trillion, President Obama mostly correctly diagnosed the problem when he said the "debt has grown so large that we could do real damage to the economy if we don't begin a process now to get our fiscal house in order." But his prescription for a fix is unfortunately barren.
Aside from philosophical objections to President Obama's tax and spend policies, practically speaking they will not work. Historically, higher taxes have not yielded more in tax revenue to government. In fact the opposite is true. As economist Thomas Sowell noted earlier this week in his syndicated column, "cuts in very high taxes ended up bringing in more revenue to government in the Coolidge, Kennedy, Reagan and Bush 43 administrations."
The broader debate over taxes comes down to one major ideological point: President Obama (with progressives in tow) believes that government is woefully underfunded. Even with additional funds from wealthy Americans though, the national debt would get little attention and instead funds would likely be diverted to other agencies or programs creating an even more robust and bloated government bureaucracy..
For Obama and his ilk government is meant to act as the arbiter for charity and the broader distribution of wealth. Progressives believe government is the most efficient way to do so. But government is not meant to be the redistributer of conscience. That is the right of the individual.
Absent from Obama's speech was any reference to the responsibility of the individual. He also failed to thoroughly discuss the need for government to better prioritize spending aside from a faint and almost cliché political sound byte calling for government to "to live within our means." Instead, Obama believes "the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more" and "that most wealthy Americans would agree" but "Washington just hasn't asked them" for that yet.
But Obama is not asking; he is attempting to confiscate in dictatorial fashion and hand out as if he were a modern day Robin Hood. Instead of allowing individuals to voluntarily act, he is attempting to take in such a way that he would further spur an entitled class of Americans to expect more "?free' stuff from government.
President Obama's speech clearly outlines two competing visions for the future of the nation; one born of our nation's founders that honors individual achievement and prosperity, or one that extorts from it.
Keep shilling for that 1% Brian. They’ll let you peak inside. But you’ll never be part of the club.
Can you read, ken? I see “2%” in the article; I don’t see “1%” anywhere. The word is “peek”, not “peak”. Only an illiterate doesn’t know the difference.
There goes the schoolmarm grading papers again. Like she never made a typo or spelling error….LOL
So, theft and invasion of privacy is perfectly acceptable to you?
The real shame is that the top 2% pay far less in taxes NOW than the did under REAGAN. Even he knew there were reasonable limits.
Along comes GW Bush lamenting the fact that he inherited a budget surplus and we were paying down our debt.
Can’t have that, Bush said….must be taking in too much money, let’s give it back to the rich.
Well, easy come, easy go. I say we go back to Reagan tax levels. After all, even then Reagan still managed to rack up historical national debt.
I’m confused. Didn’t Obama just extend Buish’s “tax cuts for the rich” only in December (during the lame duck session)? And, didn’t he justify that as necessary to boost the economy?
And now, a few months later, he wants to raise taxes? What happened to his economic concerns?
And he wants to cut $4 trillion after increasing the deficit by the same amount?
What a douche!
What you have there is a president who doesn’t have the faintest clue what to do except taking another vacation with the wife and kids. He has no center and he is entirely out of his element. Scary, huh?
What’s scary is your not correcting “rogue” with the facts.
Rogue, he extended the cuts because the ReTHUGlicans threatened to block everything else he wanted. It was justified as necessary to “boost” the economy, not due to the tax cuts for the top 2% but for the other measures passed that he actually wanted.
Pay attention next time! Or is it that you would rather lie to yourself and others?
Nice dig about Obama’s vacations too Mar, care to eat a few more facts? Here you go:
Of the 77 total “vacation” trips the former president (Bush) made to his Texas ranch while in office, nine of them "” all or part of 69 days "” came during his first year as president in 2001
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/01/president-obamas-vacation-days/
Obama extended the Bush tax cuts during the lame duck session when Democrats controlled both houses and the White House. They NEEDED NO GOP VOTES. (Now, who’s lying to themselves?)
At the time, Obama said that he had to extend the cuts because RAISING TAXES WOULD DESTROY OVER A MILLION JOBS – his words.
But, now, raising taxes won’t destroy a million jobs?
What’s scary, ExPat, is your short attention span and disconnection from reality.
The GOP plan can be summed up best in this manner.
The poorest Americans would suffer immediate, explicit budget cuts. Middle-class Americans would face distant, uncertain reductions in benefits. And the richest Americans would enjoy an immediate windfall.
Keep shilling.
Envy is an ugly green monster, ken. Keep feeding it.
A poor Russian and a poor American each have a well-off neighbor who buys a new cow.
The American prays that night, “Please God, let me make some money so I too can buy a cow like my neighbor did”.
The Russian prays, “Dear God, kill my neighbor’s cow because I don’t have one”.
I think I know how ken prays.:-)
Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR, and PBS crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in bonuses, and paid no taxes?
Yeah, me neither.
kendoop,
No one said you were the WHOLE village.
You are simply an integral part of it. That’s all.
Own it.
Hey RODAFCI. Run along. You’ve had a bad day.
Read Full Article »