Written on Saturday, December 17, 2011 by Nathaniel Davidson
Our Community-Organizer-In-Chief has long been an overt Marxist, as shown by when he told “Joe the Plumber” “it’s good if you spread the wealth around” (see full dialogue below)
Those who knew him in his younger days likewise confirm this (see College Mate: Obama Was an ‘Ardent’ ‘Marxist-Leninist’). Yet many Americans now have “buyer’s remorse” because Obama has done just what he said he would do! Fortunately they have finally opened their eyes. So Obama must try to resort to damage control. He obviously can’t stand on his record, as shown by this table. So in his latest speech, he just repeats the same old big-government, soak-the-rich mantras, and finally abandons all pretence that he’s anything but Marxist.
It shows his low opinion of Americans that he still expects them to fall for his tricks. As will be shown, his claims fail tests of basic economic theory and the history of the last hundred years. Unfortunately, even most conservatives still send their kids to be indoctrinated by the Democratic teachers’ unions at the government schools, so they are providing willing dupes for Obama’s campaign.
Obama starts off OK, describing his maternal grandparents:
[Obama] They believed in an America where hard work paid off, and responsibility was rewarded, and anyone could make it if they tried—no matter who you were, no matter where you came from, no matter how you started out. And these values gave rise to the largest middle class and the strongest economy that the world has ever known. It was here in America that the most productive workers, the most innovative companies turned out the best products on Earth. And you know what? Every American shared in that pride and in that success—from those in the executive suites to those in middle management to those on the factory floor.
All this is true. Capitalism is a win-win system, because both parties in a free exchange get something they value more. It is also the system that has made our lives so much better by providing goods that would have been considered luxuries a few decades ago. See Patriot columns The Greed Myth and Capitalism and stock market vs. gambling. But it goes downhill from here:
[Obama] But for most Americans, the basic bargain that made this country great has eroded. Long before the recession hit, hard work stopped paying off for too many people. Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success. Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments—wealthier than ever before.
Here we have the typical envy-coddling of the Left. As already shown, most of the wealthiest Americans became wealthy because they provided goods to millions of people at affordable prices. That way, their customers were better off. And the total wealth of the country as a result increased even more than the wealth of the greatest entrepreneurs. The only way to stop people becoming “wealthier than ever before” is for the government to interfere with the free choice of the buyers, as the great columnist and economist Walter Williams recently pointed out in his column Ending Income Inequality? in response to leftist economist and demagogue Paul Krugman:
“I’d ask Krugman this question: Who’s putting all the money in the hands of the few, and what do you think ought to be done to stop millions, perhaps billions, of people from using their money in ways that lead to high income and wealth concentration? In other words, I’d like Krugman to tell us what should be done to stop the millions of children who make Joanne Rowling rich, the millions who fork over their money to the benefit of LeBron James, and the hundreds of millions of people who shop at Wal-Mart.”
[Obama] But in 2008, the house of cards collapsed. We all know the story by now: mortgages sold to people who couldn’t afford them, or even sometimes understand them.
And why were these mortgages sold? Precisely because of the Community Reinvestment Act of his Democratic predecessors Carter and Clinton! This forced banks to reduce their own lending standards, to lend to minorities with lower credit scores. And quasi-government agencies increased the problem: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bundled up these mortgages. Then the Democrats covered up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our economic crisis, as you can see for yourself below. It’s not surprising, since Fannie and Freddie donated to Democrats, and then-Senator Obama was #2.
Then there is more dross about “greed” (but somehow the Left is never called “greedy” for wanting more money from the taxpayers who actually earned it), then an obscene moral equivalence between the peaceful TeaParty and the liberal crime-infested Occupy mobs.
And of course, there is more on “taxing the rich”:
[Obama] “Today, thanks to loopholes and shelters, a quarter of all millionaires now pay lower tax rates than millions of you, millions of middle-class families. Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1%. One percent.
“That is the height of unfairness. It is wrong. … It’s wrong for Warren Buffett’s secretary to pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett.”
By now, Obama must know he is “economical with the truth”. First of all, Politifact documents:
“The IRS offers a breakdown of what the 400 top earners paid in effective tax rates:
0 percent to 10 percent: 30 filers
10 percent to 15 percent: 101 filers
15 percent to 20 percent: 112 filers
20 percent to 25 percent: 52 filers
25 percent to 30 percent: 46 filers
30 percent to 35 percent: 59 filers
So 30 of the top 400 filers paid an effective tax rate of between zero and 10 percent.
How many of those paid 1 percent? We have no way of knowing.”
Also, as I explained in response to Obama’s fellow class warfare demagogue Mitt Romney, the allegedly low tax rates are likely on dividends and capital gains. The quote rates are the extra taxation rate on top of tax already paid, because this type of income suffers grossly unfair double taxation. And the claim that Buffett is taxed less than his secretary has long been debunked.
The Washington Post asked Obama for documentation for “Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1%”, and a White House official confessed they “had no actual data to back up the president’s assertion.” But since when did Obama let facts get in the way of his demagoguery?
There is so much more that needs to be said about the President’s agitprop. But this will be addressed in Part 2, to deal with more of the worst ones.