Socialist Obama Redistribution of Wealth

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2003
Socialist Obama Redistribution of Wealth
333
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 12:18am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck


At least Obama is telling us exactly what his philosophy of government actually.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-12-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 8:01pm

<

1) The reason Obama's plan is less moral is because it is redistributionist. If they were both neutral on redistribution, they would be equally flawed.

2) There is a difference between taxing and spending. Where Obama's approach is significantly worse than McCain's is that McCain is not taxing one group to give money to another. He is simply cutting taxes across the board.>>

By having a progressive tax system, you are by definition taxing one group at a higher rate (taking more of their money) so that you don't have to take as much from another (allowing them to keep more of their money). If I am using your definition of redistribution, then I see the progressive tax system as inherently redistributionist. So I can see why you argue that McCain's plan is flatter than Obama's, and therefore "less redistributionist" and "less immoral", but both are redistributionist plans in the sense that both are keeping a progressive tax system. Can we agree on that?

<>

No, you said one candidate wanted people to take a principled stand on the issues and the other didn't. That is what I disagree with. My point about McCain was that he is shifting focus away from which plan will stimulate the economy better and focusing your attention on whether wealth redistribution is moral or not. If Obama's plan could actually stimulate the economy better than McCain's, and thus actually put more money back into the hands of the wealthy (think hypothetically here, because I know you probably disagree with that premise), then I think the morality of it would be a moot point. The wealthy would just be getting back what they give and then some.

In general, I do think that wealth redistribution is not analogous to these other situations you are describing (enslaving 5% of the population; killing 5% of the population), although I think they are very clever analogies on your part. My reasoning is that the correlation between money and well-being flattens out well before you get to the top 5% of income earners. People really only need so much money to function and be happy, and there is a point where higher tax rates should really have a negligible effect on someone's well-being. Reducing excess wealth is not the same as taking away someone's freedom or their life. I also do understand your argument about the constitution and people's rights to property. But I'm not sure our founding fathers ever envisioned the kind of wealth and luxuries that we would someday have even as "middle-class" citizens. I don't think our founding fathers were gods, and we do need to be flexible in how we think of the constitution as our world changes.

Anyway, I think we probably have to just agree to disagree on this, but I have really enjoyed reading your arguments. FYI, I am really a moderate when it comes to fiscal issues, so I prefer a middle ground.



Photobucket


siggy aug 09
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-26-2007
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 8:39pm

"loans to show it. We are a military family, my husband being an officer, so he workers a lot harder then most CEO's out there."


Sorry to burst your bubble, but my husband graduated from USNA sooooo worked VERY hard for his education and then for the USMC and and has continued to work very very hard.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 9:48pm
And that worked really well, didn't it?
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2004
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 10:10pm
Regular lurker jumping in on this debate - my DH and I make well in excess of $250k and we are both voting for Obama.

Winter siggie

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 10:19pm
And what if there isn't money to be made in it?
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-09-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 10:23pm

Sorry to burst your bubble, but my husband graduated from USNA sooooo worked VERY hard for his education and then for the USMC and and has continued to work very very hard.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2004
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 10:41pm
Both DH and I grew up with NO money and worked our a**es off to get where we are today.

Winter siggie

Avatar for litlpixy
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-06-2004
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 10:58pm

"It's time to put the election behind us and the country in front of us. Barack Obama wasn't my choice, but come January 20th, he will be MY President.... I will not seek to see all

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 11:47pm
How did the change in the inheritance tax only benefit the rich?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2008
Tue, 10-28-2008 - 11:56pm

<>

You are correct, it shouldn't be assumed that those who have don't want to help those who don't. I "have" and I help those who don't everyday. Just because I don't think my taxes should be increased to "spread the wealth around" doesn't mean I don't help those who don't. Paying more in taxes is not the only way, and in fact is not the best way, to help those who don't have. I don't think my taxes should be raised because Obama thinks I should be more "neighborly".

Pages