- This topic has 4 voices and 10 replies.
-
Posts
-
There's no doubt in many of our minds that Obama is a socialist. But at what point, IOW what do we need to happen, in order for his policies to be considered communism? He's got or is close to getting the auto and banking industries. Health care will likely be the next thing under government control. So what's next? Collective farms? I don't really know much how the agricultural industry operates, but it seems the government already has a lot of control over it. It's not going to take much.IMHO, we are walking a very fine line before we become a communist government. Do we really have to get to the point where we witness the "disappearance" of 100's or 1000's of people before we wake up as a nation? Are the people of this country going to accept communism like they do socialism?
Oh, I think that people will begin to wake up the more they feel their checkbooks getting hit. A nation won't go from being capitalist to socialist without the people getting hit hard from a monetary perspective. Of course, to keep the people in line during this time the government would have to put its grip via force to suppress dissent. If we look at communist nations around the world and historically, I think all of them have been ruled by dictators or quasi-dictators. I'm doubt the people of any nation have ever democratically chosen to become communist; rather, it's forced upon them by a strongman.You bring up another issue - what is the exact distinction between communism and socialism? This is something I should know, and a distinction I've even heard before...but I forget right now.
I think the model to look at is Germany in the 20's and 30's, rather than Communism. Why did they choose National Socialism? Hitler?s expansive agenda was not what got him elected. He got elected on a platform of social stability, order, and social spending.Phid, who's checkbook is going to get hit? Obama is counting on government handouts to the 60% of the American population that don?t pay any meaningful taxes for his support. He can easily fleece the rich and productive, at least until they start fleeing the country and regressive taxation. Obama's supporters are not going to get hurt, when the rich abandon him he can always fall back on populism.It would be very easy for the country to slip into socialism and enforced "equality". Half the people are already convinced that the other half is screwing them over anyway. It is easy to talk about taking something from someone else because it is only fair after all. What then is the required leap to enforcing standardized wages, housing, clothing, etc.? Nothing, in my opinion. We are already halfway there with minimum wage, working hour limits, the so called "right to work". We are well down the slippery slope to nanny-state totalitarianism.
Scout, I think that many checkbooks will get hit because people are losing their jobs across classes. Tax the rich? We don't live in an upper/lower class society, but instead one which is majority middle class. I don't know the figures but I can't imagine that the government could bankroll all this spending on the upper class alone, so it's my guess that eventually the hatchet will fall on the middle class with higher taxes.As a capitalist I still believe in the idea of trickle-down economics (a la Reagan), although this term used to describe it probably gives it a really bad vibe. The name makes it sound like the rich live in their luxury and the poor get the scraps under the table. In reality, it's all about the rich being a large catalyst for spending within the economy. When people have more money, they don't hide it under their mattresses, but they spend it; new houses, furniture, appliances, or maybe they invest it in the stock market or keep it in a bank. In any case, it's putting money into the hands of other people who in turn need to employ others. I think I heard someone refer to the current administration's economic plan as "trickle-up economics". As we can guess, that's really not a good way of helping the economy at all (beside the fact that it implies that the government has a hand in restricting natural economic forces).
I have to answer this tomorrow when I have more time. Suffice it for now to say that the rich already bankroll all this. A minority of taxpayers pay the vast majority of taxes in this country. I will find the cite from the IRS tomorrow. The numbers may surprise you.
Isn't it like the top 2% pay over 80% of the tax base?Whenever I talk to a "rich hater" I tell him to replace the word rich with 'employer' next time he critisizes them. It's actually worked a few times. I also mention that the owner/president of our company is considered rich by Obama's standards and I ask what's going to happen to OUR pay or benefits when Obama taxes our "evil rich" employer.
I found this in The American, the journal of the American Enterprise Institute
2. What income group pays the most federal income taxes today?The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul?dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per?cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent?those below the median income level?now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don?t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.
The complete article is here: Guess Who Really Pays the Taxes It is instructive that the liberals always talk about lower and middle class tax-cuts when they are not the groups paying the majority of taxes in the first place.Ski, you make an excellent point. What will happen when they tax all these rich people too much and they decide to take their marbles and go elsewhere? I am sure they will be able to find a country that is willing to let them enjoy the fruits of their labor and intellect. America used to be that place, but it is rapidly changing to be unfriendly to the industrious and successful. The American dream is changing from work hard and succeed to sit around and take from those that work hard.This is an academic paper that discusses the same thing. "Further Analysis of the Distribution of Income and Taxes, 1979-2002"
Your right…people need to wake up and smell the stench that's coming our way with this administration.
If you think about it, America started down the path of socialism with the new deal and LBJ edged us a little farther down the path with the Great Society. Obama is just continuing a trend with his ideas about health care and education. What really scares me is federal involvement in education. How long until there is a standard Federal k-12 curriculum? Also is it coincidence that the massive public spending measures originate with Democrats?The most disappointing thing is that there is not enough resistance from conservatives to social spending. In fact, they aggravate it at times. Medicare drug benefit, NCLB etc. I think we need to escape the conservative/liberal paradigm and look to basics. What do the founding documents of America say? What kind of country and government do we NEED, not what do we want. The ideal to me is maximum freedom and minimum government intervention.I was half joking yesterday about buying a farm in Idaho when I retire and stocking it with as many guns and as much food as I can buy and wiring the place to resist the American version of the Gestapo when they come to take away what few freedoms I still have. I am starting to understand the motivation for the Militia and Freedmen. It disheartens and saddens me to see our civil liberties thrown away in the name of security and welfare checks.
How long until there is a standard Federal k-12 curriculum?
Wait a minute here! There already is. Look at the mandatory, and pre-NCLB, requirements for testing, the federal reading programs like SRA (I think that's what it was/is called), the teachers HAVE to get to the point of teaching certain things, regardless whether or not all the students grasp the previous lessons.
You are right to an extent. There are mandatory tests that must be passed. There is not however, a standard curriculum detailing lessons to be taught. There are also not standard national textbooks. There is still a role for local school boards to play even though it has been proscribed to a great extent by the mandates required by the federal government to qualify for federal funding.Federal funding for education and other things is a whole other issue entirely. The first thing we need to do is get rid of the income tax and let the states gather their own revenue for their own state responsibilities. The government forces a say in local issues by holding the purse strings. They hold these strings by claiming they are equitably distributing funds. I call foul. What the federal government is doing is usurping the power of state and local government. If we had honest courts these laws would have been thrown out long ago.Many laws would not exist if the courts were actually honest. My short list would include the Kelo decision, Americans with Disabilities Act, Gun Control of any stripe, any taxes except for customs and excise taxes, civil rights legislation(which only creates a privileged minority), and last but not least, Roe v. Wade(abortion is a state issue).I should have voted for Ron Paul, at least he was the right kind of crazy.
Here is a nice quote from Larry Elder's thursday column
Obama seeks to replace entrepreneurs with bureaucrats. He emboldens our enemies, who interpret his words of outreach and humility as signs of weakness. His actions — while well-intended — represent a menace to the continued security and prosperity of this nation. He smiles. He reproaches America. And much of the “world community” applauds.
Obama: The Charming Menace to Peace and Prosperity I will never understand the left and their belief that enemies respect weakness. The analogy is that if you give the school bully your lunch money he will leave you alone. In my experience, the school bully picks on you more because you are an easy target. The same goes with rogue states and terrorists, they respect resolve and strength; desires to negotiate and make nice are correctly interpreted as weakness. North Korea has proven that condemnations from that waste of space called the UN are not even worth the electrons they are transmitted with. The DPRK is more than happy to let the UN condemn them because that means the rest of the world is going to do nothing to stop them. I bet if we bombed their launch site and told them we would continue to do so until they announce the locations and state of missile and nuclear research they would submit after we bombed several more sites to prove our resolve. Hell we could have just shot down the missile they launched last week and then bombed the pad. Instead, we made lots of noise about putting interceptors into position and then did nothing, which proves the Wests impotence to Kim Jong-Il. The west is in decline because we are afraid to use our own power because the rest of the world and the liberals among us would call us mean.
