Redistributing Wealth

Thanks to A Chicago Blog for this article.

This letter appeared in the Tribune’s Voice of the People Wednesday:

On my way to lunch recently, I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read “Vote Obama; I need the money.” I laughed. In a restaurant my server had on an “Obama 08″ tie. Again I laughed. Just imagine the coincidence. When the bill came, I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Barack-Obama-redistribution-of-wealth concept. He stood there in disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need—the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight. I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I’ve decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful. At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment, I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient deserved money more. I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.

It’s the economy, stupid!

I’ve been going through my Reader, catching up on all my blogs, and I caught this fascinating article over on American Thinker.  Exactly Wrong, Again 

“We are not in recession.  The economy of the last eight years has been fine.  And we are doing better than our European know-it-alls who favor an Obama victory.  At least that’s what the most recent economic data show.”

Statistically, we’ve been better under Bush than we were under Clinton, although Liberals would have you believe otherwise.  Taxes were much higher under Clinton, so don’t get so excited when Obama tells you he’s going to “put things back” to Clinton levels.  Be afraid, be very afraid. 

Check out the article linked above and you’ll see what I mean.  It’s been better in America under Bush than it was under Clinton, and it’s better in America than it is in Europe.  So if Bush is supposed to be some kind of economic problem, why are things worse in Europe than they are here?

Ch-ch-ch-changes

Is your job in jeopardy too?

I was browsing through some videos over on Yahoo, and saw this one about jobs and the economy.  As I was watching, I noticed that the states losing job are mostly blue states, while the states gaining jobs are red states.  Think about it.

American jobs in jeopardy

Spread the Wealth – Old News!

It isn’t new, this idea Obama has to spread the wealth around.  I mean, yes, it’s an old Marxist (Communist) ideology, but it’s also something Obama’s been touting for years now.  Take a listen to this radio interview from 2001.

(h/t Chicagoans Against Obama)

Obama’s Tax Cuts

They are an illusion.  They won’t happen.  Here – read the Wall Street Journal.  You’ll see what I – and others – are talking about.  Obama’s 95% Illusion

Check out the chart below, and tell me where you see Obama’s famed “tax cuts.”  Where does the blue line dip below the green one?  Don’t see it?  That’s because it doesn’t exist.  He has no intention of giving out any tax cuts.  What he plans to do is “redistribute the wealth,” implement “economic justice.”  In regular-person speak, that’s called socialism.  And it’s FAILED every time it’s been tried.  You simply can NOT tax a society into prosperity, period.  That’s just basic economics.

Think you’re exempt because you’re a “low-income wage earner”?  You need to understand this, and the WSJ said it best:

There’s another catch: Because Mr. Obama’s tax credits are phased out as incomes rise, they impose a huge "marginal" tax rate increase on low-income workers. The marginal tax rate refers to the rate on the next dollar of income earned. As the nearby chart illustrates, the marginal rate for millions of low- and middle-income workers would spike as they earn more income.

Under Obama, your tax rate will spike.  The politics of hope and change?  What Obama really means when he says that is that you’ll hope there’s change left in your paycheck after Obama’s through taxing it. 

Obama Tells Tax-Burdened Plumber the Plan is to ‘Spread the Wealth Around’

“I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody." Barack Obama

 

 

Bottom line – blue

Is it just me or do you see it too?  The top image is from a link a friend of mine sent me.  As I looked at the map, I realized it seemed oddly familiar to me.  Then it dawned on me – it was pretty similar to the red/blue state breakdowns I’d seen on news sites and other blogs.  So I went and gathered some other data.  I got a map of the projected electoral vote for the current election, a map of a breakdown by each state’s Senators, and also one by each state’s Representatives.  A clearer image began to emerge for me.  In general, the “bluer” a state is when you combine all these factors – how they’re likely to vote come November, and how they’ve elected their most recent Senators and Representatives, the greater their current fiscal woes.

Coincidence?  I think not.  In general – not always but in general – Conservatives are more likely than Liberals to be fiscally responsible.  Now we seem to have evidence that bears this out.  My state, IL, is one of the bluest in the nation and I know we’re in serious trouble.  Sure, there’s some exceptions, but we can see that in general, the bluer the state, the worse trouble it’s in.  Reason enough to vote Republican this election – not just the Presidential seat, but all your local and state elections that are occurring this November as well.  Don’t forget the current fiscal mess we’re in was caused almost exclusively by Democrats, and the current Congress is Democrat controlled.  Something to think about.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

©DarcsFalcon

It’s not the Republicans fault

For years, the Democrats have been saying there’s nothing wrong with Freddie and Fannie.  They lied, and then tried to blame the Republicans for their mistakes.  Obama and Biden are still trying to do the same thing.  Don’t forget, Obama was the 2nd largest recipient of campaign funds from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to the tune of $126,349.  He has a vested interest in covering up the scandal. 

Fannie and Freddie

You won’t see too much about this in the regular press.  How the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac meltdown was actually started by Clinton.  How Obama was one of it’s biggest recipients.  This article by Dr. Jon Lott is pretty informative.  Even the NY Times understood that this meltdown was going to occur 10 years ago

More information here: Confused Americans for Truth – Another False Obama Rumor

An awesome video also gives a rundown on what happened.

Background info

Would you like some insight into what caused this whole financial mess our country is in right now?  Check out this video.

(h/t Backyard Conservative)