Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Obama: Redistribution Of Wealth Is A Fairness Issue

It's all about compassion and being "my brother's keeper."

And the clapping seals approve.

Please watch the short video below:


Related reading...Spreading the Wealth Around: The Academic Roots of Redistributionism.

Excerpt:
Here, we need to look only at the second dimension of [John] Rawls’ second principle, his “difference principle.”...

[...]

It is luck—capricious, arbitrary, unfair luck—that accounts for the fortunes of “the advantaged” and the misfortunes of “the disadvantaged.”...

Thus, to rectify this inherent unfairness, justice demands that the only inequalities arising from differences between the better off and worse off that will be permitted are those that benefit the latter.

Justice, in other words, requires that the resources and fruits of the producers be perpetually redistributed to the takers.

Rawls may be among the most prominent of contemporary moral philosophers to exploit the role of luck in life to justify a robust agenda of redistribution, but his thought represents that of the vast majority of his peers in academia.

And it is as well representative of such politicians as Barack Obama.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton has apparently decided to tack further to the Left.  No doubt, she also favors redistribution of wealth — but not her own wealth, of course. She fully intends to hang on to her nest egg.

43 comments:

  1. Ah, the good ol' CLASS WARFARE tactic rages on and on, but THIS time in a low-key, well-modulated voice from a well tailored, presentable-looking youngish person who can almost speak English with a passable accent.

    Beware always of wolves in sheep's clothing.

    The Great Game continues just as it has since the beginning of organized society. The NAMES and LABELS may change, but in essence only the MONEY changes hands. "Revolutions" merely supplant one tyrant ––- or one set of oligarchs –– with another.


    "In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."

    ~ Voltaire (1694-1778)

    All that is meant by the slogan "More Power to the People" is that the people who cry "More Power to the People" mean to get more power for themselves.

    That's a safe bet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If my "brother" didn't earn some of my wealth...then my "brother doesn't get to keep any of it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Apparently not - see this Tale of 3 Brothers:
      https://youtu.be/S6HEH23W_bM

      Delete
  3. Leftwingers are so generous and compassionate...

    With other people's money.

    It is telling that conservatives give much more to charity that libs.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Could we have at least one day with him just playing golf and not telling us he has to have our stash?

    ReplyDelete
  5. One dirty little secret of these income comparisons is that they often don't compare like with like. There was a great deal of hollering in the 90's and later about minorities who make much less than whites. An intelligent researcher renormed the data in one big study that hit the news with 'unfair' headlines. What he found was the white population was much more heavily weighted with people in their peak earning years, than the minority (in this case Hispanic) earners who were largely very young and in their early working years. When he compared among AGE GROUPS - what a difference! Virtually none in the under 30 group. There were, of course, disparities in people in their 50's as you had established whites and Hispanic newcomers competing in the same market but without education and language skills. Of course you'd expect differences. But as the next generation comes along those differences virtually disappeared!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, and "they" aways fail to take into account the regional variability in purchasing power of the dollar.

      A dollar in rural western Virginia will stretch a lot farther than it willing the Washington Metro end of the state.

      It would likely go even farther in rural areas of the South and Midwest. Just study real estate all over the country, and you'll see right away what I mean.

      Delete
    2. Baysider,
      Have you by any chance read Amy Chua's The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America? In the book, there is a discussion of generational changes in different immigrant groups.

      I highly recommend the above book.

      Delete
    3. Thank you! It's been on my Audible wish list for awhile. This is a good nudge to buy it next time around.

      Delete
  6. He has nothing else to stand on other than the attacking the successful to pander to his base. I have no problems with Buffet. Gates, Soros, and the Hollywood elite paying more and sharing their wealth.

    So far he has failed at everything except ruining the middle class and further segregating the nation. Instead of promoting opportunities it is much easier to provide entitlements and blame others for your failure to lead.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd liketo know how he managed to further segregate the nation.

      Frankly, I believ that stays with you and the rest of the Teabags.

      Delete
    2. Oh, and the weakening of the middle class was started long ago with St. Ronnie Raygun initiating the largest upward transfer of wealth in our history and laying the groundwork for tinkle down economics.

      Obama being right of center has continued the policies but to think that he is uniquely responsible is ridiculous.

      Delete
    3. Oh, and the weakening of the middle class was started long ago with St. Ronnie Raygun initiating the largest upward transfer of wealth in our history and laying the groundwork for tinkle down economics.

      Obama being right of center has continued the policies but to think that he is uniquely responsible is ridiculous.

      Delete
    4. Duck,
      I'd appreciate it if you'd quit using the term teabags. I know the slang connotation of that term, and I can't imagine that you, too, don't know that connotation.

      Delete
    5. It's a fixation with the left. The supposedly gay-loving progressives love hurling gay slurs

      Delete
    6. Ducky said: "Oh, and the weakening of the middle class was started long ago with St. Ronnie Raygun initiating the largest upward transfer of wealth in our history and laying the groundwork for tinkle down economics."

      He didn't initiate any "upward transfer of wealth". There is no evidence of this. And trickle down is FAR better than the left-wing alternative, where nothing comes down (and the rulers enrich and empower themselves through the theft of rapacious taxation). Compare the Reagan era, when the black middle class grew very strongly, to the Obama era, with its significant increase in black poverty and unemployment.

      Delete
    7. Ducky said: "Obama being right of center has continued the policies but to think that he is uniquely responsible is ridiculous."

      Obama is definitely left of center. He has made things worse not by continuing Reagan's good policies. but by going left (pushing for middle class tax hikes, regulations/etc to drive businesses offshore, fostering unions to force businesses to offshire and fire people, and lots more)

      Delete
  7. I could only listen for 3/4 of the video. It literally turns my stomach to hear a president suggest that he knows when a person has earned "more than he can spend and his whole family can spend." it's none of Obama's BUSINESS.

    Now I'll stand back and let the libs here tell me I'm against good education for our children because I'm denying them that hedge fund manager's money, and those who would inherit his money.

    And then we'll be told this isn't Socialism. The fun never ends, does it.
    What happened to America?

    When will he learn that it's often not money which helps make a better school, that sometimes involvement is important. Or how about all the good he could do in our minority communities if he'd start and keep up an anti-drug message (Where's Mrs. Obama on that? The kids threw all our hard earned money in broccoli away when she demanded it be served at schools...maybe she could do something that works?), anti-unwed moms, anti gangs?
    just a thought. Get those in line and see how our schools improve.
    You get AWAY from our money, Obama....you've got enough; gonna give most away?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't worry, Z.

      He still talks the talk to attempt to keep the left in line especially with the flap over TPP.
      But he'll be right there screwing you over along with the rest of his right of center buddies when push comes to shove.

      "Now you can hardly stand it, though
      By now you know
      It's not going to stop
      It's not going to stop
      It's not going to stop
      Till you wise up"

      Delete
    2. you're starting to sound even more unhinged.

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. No, uhinged is a Frontpagemag toadie writing that Obama is influenced by Rawls. Completely risible.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. It is interesting how frightened the right is of Rawls contention that a sound moral philosophy must be developed without concern for self interest or at least developed by perceived equals.

      Seems sound to me. Why do you object to it?

      Delete
    7. Yea that will work alright, cause you consider everyone here your philosophical and moral equal and you have never elevated yourself at the expense of someone else.

      See, works just fine, if you're a mindless piss-ant.

      Delete
    8. Ducky, interesting how you can pick out one bit of Rawls and attack those on the right for not going along with those supposedly pushing for less concern for self interest. I just saw the Frontpagemag article and it's so rife with exactly what the right is fighting (you'd think you'd FINALLY get it), but you just simply will not pay attention and THINK.

      Read Warren's comment....he's exactly right. THINK.

      Delete
    9. Ducky, interesting how you can pick out one bit of Rawls and attack those on the right for not going along with those supposedly pushing for less concern for self interest. I just saw the Frontpagemag article and it's so rife with exactly what the right is fighting (you'd think you'd FINALLY get it), but you just simply will not pay attention and THINK.

      Read Warren's comment....he's exactly right. THINK.

      Delete
    10. Duck,

      What is interesting how the left attacks Reagan. All he did was take over from the, at that time, the most incompetent president in history. He was faced with a horrible economy, high interest rates and a demoralized country. He did not blame his incompetent predecessor but brought the country back from desperate times. Raising employment and wages while inspiring the country.

      Whoever takes over from the current incompetent will have a lot to accomplish because now we have declining world respect as a leading country and a weak economy. We could use another Reagan.

      Delete
    11. Duck, your recollection of history is colorfully painted.

      As I personally recall and as history books show, Carter inherited many problems from the Nixon Administration. Even though he stepped into record unemployment, outrages interest rates, and high oil prices, by the end of his term he was able to claim an increase of nearly eight million jobs and a decrease in the budget deficit.

      Carter’s problems really focused around the seizure as hostages of the U. S. embassy staff in Iran. This dominated the news but doesn’t represent his entire presidency. Carter’s achievements include establishing a national energy policy, decontrolling domestic petroleum prices to stimulate production, prompting government efficiency through civil service reform and proceeded with deregulation of the trucking and airline industries, creating the Department of Education, bolstering the Social Security system, through the Camp David agreement of 1978, he helped bring amity between Egypt and Israel, succeeded in obtaining ratification of the Panama Canal treaties, and established full diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China and completed negotiation of the SALT II nuclear limitation treaty with the Soviet Union.

      It amazes me to find the Reagan allegiance of today's so-called conservatives as in reality, he raised taxes 8 times, gave amnesty to illegal immigrants, and bloated the size of government.

      I also find telling how today's so-called conservatives develop an amnesia when arguing economic history. It's as if the was no George W. Bush era and Obama somehow crashed the economy and racked up untold debt.

      Delete
    12. The above comment was intended for Skudrunner rather than Duck.

      Delete
    13. Z said: "Now I'll stand back and let the libs here tell me I'm against good education for our children because I'm denying them that hedge fund manager's money, and those who would inherit his money. "

      Good point. The government is stealing so much of our money that federal tax revenues are at near record highs. Meanwhile, schools increase class sizes and cut supplies because of the gross overpay of teachers (thanks to the NEA).

      The problem with education clearly has nothing to do with the government not stealing enough from hedge fund managers.

      Delete
    14. Ronald Ward said: "It's as if the was no George W. Bush era and Obama somehow crashed the economy and racked up untold debt."

      The seeds of the economic collapse were sown when Andrew Cuomo helped create the racist "CRA", which demanded that the government give out uinsupported loans based on skin color. The insanity expanded when Fanny and Freddie forced banks to make bad loans. The wheels came off when the Dems took over Congress in 2006.

      In regards to this. Bush's blame is that he didn't try harder to stop the Democrats, and that he gave the banks handouts alongside Obama.

      Delete
  8. Well sure. incompetent buttheads like obama couldn't possibly understand what success from hard work means. They have no idea. People relate to everything using their own ability and experience [or lack thereof in obammys case]. obama is a loser (and much more) and therefore thinks everyone else is. Man, I can't wait till this POS is gone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What's going to change?

      I say, nothing. Maybe you can explain how the middle class is going to benefit from a Republican president.

      Delete
    2. How about more jobs for the middle class when taxes are lessened on companies which HIRE....or how about lowering taxes on middle class small businesses? How about school vouchers so middle class kids have a chance? How about closing the border, finally(and I'll admit the GOP hasn't been much better at this than Obama) so jobs can be kept by the middle class instead of squeezed out by Mexicans who'll work for nothing?
      You can figure out more. try

      Delete
  9. Good old Nostradumbass, just a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen.

    Maybe you can explain how one of your dumbassed pseudo-socialists is going to do anything to the middle class except steal their meager savings to fund their stupid failed social experiments and line their pockets?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Warren,
      Good old Nostradumbass, just a pyromaniac in a field of strawmen.

      Great metaphor!

      Delete
  10. Society's lottery winners don't tend to stay rich long. Money gets placed into their hands that they did not earn and, if they don't have the moxie for proper stewardship, often lose as easily. So we don't depend on 'lottery winners' to bail us out.

    Mr. Obama needs to read Mr. Williams' column today instead. Ills Of Blacks Due To Government, Not Racism. http://tinyurl.com/Ills-of-Blacks

    Nothing will eradicate poverty. But it will wane -- or wax, if you follow the state formulas in vogue over the last 80 years which has made the cost of self-destructive behavior less costly by spreading it across millions of others who don't share the behavior. Sort of like 3rd payers in health care.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @ Ducky "It is interesting how frightened the right is of Rawls contention that a sound moral philosophy must be developed without concern for self interest or at least developed by perceived equals."

    Jesus Christ preached a similar message, and we believe in it, Ducky. Conservative give to charity way more that liberals.

    What we oppose is leftwing loons preaching government morality, while simultaneously screaming about the danger of those scary and shadowy "DOMINIONISTS" mounting a government coup under the guidance of the ghosts of Ronald Reagan and Jerry Falwell.

    You lefties are nuts. You reject the basic teachings of Christ and say they have no place in government or even the public square, but then you take John Rawls and Karl Marx and put them on pedestals and insist we base government "morality" upon their writings.

    Christians, or any sincere people for that matter, don't need a government-enforced 'morality.'

    Ask the victims of Pol Pot, Stalin, Mussolini, Chavez or Castro how government enforced 'morality' worked out for them.

    It is frightening and sickening how people will vehemently reject religious moralists, and then bend over and pull their pants down for political preachers. The final twist is that the bleating sheep call this "Progress."

    ReplyDelete
  12. Redistribution of wealth is purely an issue of the lazy and greedy wanting to get the government to steal people's rightful property and give it to them. It is immoral in the extreme. Those who demand this need to be treated as pigs, not human beings. Give thse oinkers a muddy pen and a feeding trough.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective