The Socialist believes in ‘spreading the wealth around’. His methods require an overlord, with naive good intentions, taking from the rich and giving to the poor, but based on tried and failed principles of socialism. The Capitalist, by tried and proven principles of capitalism, knows that the result of staying clear of the machinery of business, and instead stimulating it, will allow business to spread wealth automatically without the overlord, the theft, and without the resentment.
-Tickler
Capitalism
Shift from Capitalism to Socialism, European Style
From the WSJ…
The most basic explanation for why Barack Obama may win next Tuesday is that voters want economic deliverance. The standard fix for this in politics everywhere is to crowbar the old party out and patch in the other one. It is true as well that the historic nature of the nation’s first African-American candidacy would play a big role.
Push past the historic candidacy, however, and one sees something even larger at stake in this vote… The real “change” being put to a vote for the American people in 2008 is not simply a break from the economic policies of “the past eight years” but with the American economic philosophy of the past 200 years. This election is about a long-term change in America’s idea of itself.
I don’t agree with the argument that an Obama-Pelosi-Reid government is a one-off, that good old nonideological American pragmatism will temper their ambitions. Not true. With this election, the U.S. is at a philosophical tipping point.
The goal of Sen. Obama and the modern, “progressive” Democratic Party is to move the U.S. in the direction of Western Europe, the so-called German model and its “social market economy.” Under this notion, business is highly regulated, as it would be in the next Congress under Democratic House committee chairmen Markey, Frank and Waxman. Business is allowed to create “wealth” so long as its utility is not primarily to create new jobs or economic growth but to support a deep welfare system.
…
This would be a historic shift, one post-Vietnam Democrats have been trying to achieve since their failed fight with Ronald Reagan’s “Cowboy Capitalism.”
Of course Cowboy Capitalism built the country. More than any previous nation in history, the United States made its way forward on a 200-year wave of upwardly mobile, profit-seeking merchants, tradesmen, craftsmen and workers. They blew out of New England and New York, rolled across the wildernesses of the Central States, pushed across a tough Western frontier and banged into San Francisco and Los Angeles, leaving in their path city after city of vast wealth.
The U.S. emerged a superpower, and the tool of that ascent was simple — the pursuit of economic growth. Now China, India and Brazil, embracing high-growth Cowboy Capitalism, are doing what we did, only their cities are bigger.
Now comes Barack Obama, standing at the head of a progressive Democratic Party, his right hand rising to say, “Mothers, don’t let your babies grow up to be for-profit cowboys. It’s time to spread the wealth around.”
READ IT HERE, [an itemized list of European yoke-style government policies Obama-Reid-Pelosi will install.]
Video: Escaped The Plantation, Voting McCain
Perhaps the best speech given during this entire campaign cycle.
The O-Team
More genius by ZO. See more great clips here
Obama’s Socialist Tax, In His Own Words
Obama’s mouth keeps on giving. Unfortunately, his mouth is writing check his butt can’t cash. The Tickler appeals to all readers, use your brain and show up to vote. We can’t let this guy get into office.
Plumber: “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn’t it.”
Obama: “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind ya, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around it’s good for everybody.” Obama the crooked imbecile on the stump (see the video here)
From the desk of the Tickler’s wife…
Here are some key takeaways from the WSJ piece on the true nature of Obama’s tax “cuts”:
Here’s the political catch. All but the clean car credit would be “refundable,” which is Washington-speak for the fact that you can receive these checks even if you have no income-tax liability. In other words, they are an income transfer — a federal check — from taxpayers to nontaxpayers. Once upon a time we called this “welfare,” or in George McGovern’s 1972 campaign a “Demogrant.” Mr. Obama’s genius is to call it a tax cut.
The Tax Foundation estimates that under the Obama plan 63 million Americans, or 44% of all tax filers, would have no income tax liability and most of those would get a check from the IRS each year. The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis estimates that by 2011, under the Obama plan, an additional 10 million filers would pay zero taxes while cashing checks from the IRS.
The total annual expenditures on refundable “tax credits” would rise over the next 10 years by $647 billion to $1.054 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center. This means that the tax-credit welfare state would soon cost four times actual cash welfare. By redefining such income payments as “tax credits,” the Obama campaign also redefines them away as a tax share of GDP. Presto, the federal tax burden looks much smaller than it really is.
Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, one root of evil is Barney Frank
The shockingly oblivious Democrat from Massachusetts Barney Frank has proven himself to be one of the most vehement protectors of crap management and a record-breaking flusher of others’ wealth. Thanks for the new $200+ billion invoice. And for the liberals and conservatives out there, I don’t want to hear another word about the 10 billion/month we’re spending in Iraq attracting and subsequently pulverizing extreme Muslims. Barney Frank and his kind just waged a single day war on the taxpayer (read “rich white conservatives”, not the “working people”) to the price tag of 18 months in Iraq.
Asked about Treasury’s modest bailout condition that the companies reduce the size of their high-risk mortgage-backed securities (MBS) portfolios starting in 2010, Mr. Frank was quoted on Monday as saying, “Good luck on that,” and that it would never happen.
There you have the Fannie Mae problem in profile. Mr. Frank wants you to pick up the tab for its failures, while he still vows to block a reform that might prevent the same disaster from happening again.
At least the Massachusetts Democrat is consistent. His record is close to perfect as a stalwart opponent of reforming the two companies, going back more than a decade. The first concerted push to rein in Fan and Fred in Congress came as far back as 1992, and Mr. Frank was right there, standing athwart. But things really picked up this decade, and Barney was there at every turn.
Oh, and the best part? Many of the irresponsible people who got into houses they never could have afforded may get to stay in those houses, on my dime. You’re welcome. Now grow up and use your brain next time. The formula is as follows: work your tail off, get promoted, work your tail off, get promoted, buy a house you can afford in good times and bad, work your tail off, retire. I’m keeping it simple, because buying twice the house you can afford — just because some greedy (and stupid) bankers dangled the carrot — means you can’t follow complex.
Oh, and the greedy bankers? Here’s some for you. We must have experienced a decade of MBAs on Wall Street who were apparently the drunken weak link on their teams in school. Oh, except for the Goldman Sachs guys, they were the ones doing the work.
Do I sound angry? Yeah, I’m angry.
McCain Proves Superior At Saddleback
I hope everyone had a chance watch the forum with McCain and Barry Oblivious. If not, please do so below. While Obama was struggling to begin half of his responses with uhhh, ummm, I, I, I think…, McCain had clear ideas with conviction in them and his whole presence was much more impressive than I expected. It’s good to see the relatively unscripted side of these two (though of course they both have somewhat memorized positions on all of these issues).
Obama
Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3 – Part 4 – Part 5 – Part 6
McCain
Part 1 – Part 2 – Part 3 – Part 4 – Part 5
Related articles…
Ich Bin Ein Beginner, Obama Spews People’s Party Bolshevik
Listen to this…
“Now is the time to join together through constant cooperation and strong institutions and shared sacrifice and a global commitment to progress to meet the challenges of the 21st century.”
Is it suddenly 1917 Petrograd again? Is anyone listening to this? Here’s the translation for those who don’t speak liberal.
“Now is the time to join together through world government and mo’ better of that government. I’ll put America on the stick to sacrifice much more freedom and treasure, and we’ll do our best to weaken America so it can be less intimidating and on equal footing with Europe (and someday the paradise Kenya), to meet the challenges of defeating the formidable patriotic and hard-working folks on the U.S. Right.”
The Sock Puppet is reliving the halucinations from his father (or as best he can remember having spend 1 visit with him). Not sure why he chose to write a book with a title referencing a man he never knew, and by behavior shouldn’t have wanted to.
“This is the moment when we must build on wealth that opens markets have created and share its benefits more equitably.”
I don’t need to break that down for you. Government regulated and enforced wealth redistribution, in plain terms. I’m always surprised when liberals say this out in the open. I’m even more surprised we don’t all pick up rocks. Wake up America, this guy is as scary as they come.
Glenn Beck commented on that last quote as follows…
I’ve always wanted to be able to write music. I can’t write music. I can meet with composers and I can say, you know, I want it to feel like this, I want it to do this, but I cannot write music. Should John Williams share his creativity with me? Should he ‑‑ he’s got a wealth of strong writing ability. Should I force him to share that song writing ability more equitably? That’s his gift. He chooses to use it. I have met people with gifts of music, with gifts of business, with gifts of comedic talent, acting talent, business talent that don’t use it. It’s their loss. Shared prosperity, sharing the benefits more equitably. It goes against everything that America stood for. What we share is an idea and we want that idea to spread and, that is, man is free, man is free to create, man is free to do as he sees fit. That is the only thing that we should be sharing more equitably. We should be sharing it to every corner of the globe. We should be sharing it with everyone who will listen and if you don’t listen, that’s fine. You don’t want freedom, that’s fine. If your people want freedom, we stand with your people. If your people decide they don’t want freedom, they’re happy living under totalitarianism state, they’re happy handing their power back over to a totalitarian guilt of the like they do in Russia, that’s fine, but not here and we’ll continue to share that wealth of that idea that you can be successful, you can be happy, you can be rich, you can be poor, you can have all of the benefits because there is no end to wealth, there is no end to happiness. It is an infinite idea. It’s a never ending idea. It is as vast as the oceans and far beyond. Why should I share the oceans more equitably? There’s enough water in there for all of us. Stop diminishing the size. Stop telling me that the ocean is a pond. It’s not. Get into the water. It’s fine. You might need directions to the beach, but I ain’t putting a fence around that beach just for you. I’m not telling people who have been on that beach and use that beach and get into that water and swim and boat and water‑ski and turn it into energy, I’m not telling those people, no, no, no you can’t because someday these people may need that water brought to them because they can’t go to the beach, they don’t believe in the beach, they just want all the benefits of the beach. The only thing we share is an idea and a love of freedom.
Thanks Glenn. Well put.
(Credit to Michael Ramirez for the “ich bin…” line, clever fellow.)
In with Men’s Vogue and Best Life, out with Portfolio, Esquire, GQ
I just cancelled my subscription to Conde Nast Portfolio (a new business/financial magazine I decided to give a try). Much as I tried to give them 5-6 issues of the benefit of doubt, I couldn’t find more than one or two reasonable capitalist representations — awww, come on, who’d want that in a business/financial magazine? — between the rampant socialist (er, uh, progressive) world view writing that litters the filler folded neatly within the glossy cover. The best I can say for Portfolio in print is, nice graphic design. That said, I’ve found the online version to actually contain some balance, so far. Doesn’t mean I’ll make it daily, or even weekly reading, since the agenda seems to be set from the upper offices and is sure to filter down at some point. Clearly against the level-headed and mostly reasonable financial publications, Conde Nast saw a possibly under-served market in the knowingly undeserving white-guilt democrats in finance (read Jamie Dimon of JPMC and the like), and jumped on it. As an aside, I can never wrap my head around how even the worse white-guilt could sway those who see how the economy works or doesn’t day in and day out. Like a wise man I know always says, there’s a butt for every seat.
I’ve also recently canceled my subscriptions to GQ and Esquire, two magazines that have taken such a blatant and frankly militant dive to the Left, and pushing that agenda, that I don’t even recognize them anymore. As for GQ, only Glen O’Brien remains the bright shining light, but his column isn’t political so it’s hard to go wrong. As an aside, I find it interesting that in 25 years of reading his solutions to our sartorial conundrums, I’ve disagreed with his advice maybe twice. Thanks Glen. Pick up GQ on the newsstand, read The Style Guy column and put it down. GQ went away in the early 1990’s from where I sit.
Men’s Vogue and Best Life are my new straight guy’s style and culture mags (though I’ve already noticed the odd emasculating article starting to surface here and there in Best Life). Men’s Vogue is surprisingly reminiscent of the golden age of GQ back in the 80’s, before they decided that staff metro-sexuals should expand beyond fashion and also run editorial. Growing up in a relatively small town, I loved to read about the far-away places and things that I became determined to grow up and travel to and do, which I have done and more, all mingled with pages and pages of style ideas and great classic graphic design (as opposed to the schizophrenic Wired-wanna-be of late years). Men’s Vogue has all of the old good, with none of the new bad. The random timeless accoutrements that are reviewed in reverence return me to the wide-eyed early materialist dreamer of my childhood, and gadget/destination collector that I am today.
I mourn the passing of the previously classic men’s magazines, but while there remains a market of guys like me to satisfy, I have hope for the future. Men’s Vogue and Best Life are a good start of the revival.
Socialist vs. Capitalist Systems, Great Old Clip
It’s strangely timely and relevant still today, right?
I know what some will say… so let’s all say it together… The propaganda I agree with is good propaganda!
But being one who cherishes the existence of absolute truth, there is a better way for pretty much everything. Feigning open-mindedness only gets you into the popular clubs, it won’t gain you substance.