When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist? | Page 6 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
Champagne
New Orleans Saints Fan
French and Spanish Empire Border
Member since Oct 2007
12540 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

Why is it suddenly Marxist when Obama does it?


It's rather Marxist no matter who does it.

Obama himself stated that he believes in redistributive policies in order to achieve fairness. Did you think he was lying to us when he said that?






Back to top
WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
16563 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


An open border immigration policy was fundemental to the founders philosophy as well.

It's the 21st century.






Back to top
cahoots
LSU Fan
Red Stick
Member since Jan 2009
2016 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

Obama himself stated that he believes in redistributive policies in order to achieve fairness. Did you think he was lying to us when he said that?



Put the rhetoric aside and focus on the numbers. He wants to raise the upper tax rate by ~5% to a level that is still lower than it has been throughout most of the past century.







Back to top
  Replies (0)
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

Are you suggesting that when we look for the clear meaning of a document that the document can "imply" that we must ignore the explicit four corners of limits specifically enumerated by that document?

In other words, are you suggesting that the US Constitution is written in some kind of secret code that only leftist and activist jurists can understand?



Huh? No, I'm not arguing that the document can mean anything you want it to mean. I'm simply pointing out that its meanings are not, in fact, "clear" to every tweedle-dum like yourself who fancies he understands it. Rather, an interpretation of the document has to be made on a clear line of legal reasoning.

At any rate, the whole contest between implied powers folks and specifically, clearly, plain as a summer's day enumerated powers folks was settled even before the 19th century.






Back to top
MrTide33
Alabama Fan
Southeastern Central North America
Member since Nov 2012
3205 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


You still have not destoryed my analogy..





Back to top
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


Why should I bother "destroying" something which is half-baked to begin with?





Back to top
MrTide33
Alabama Fan
Southeastern Central North America
Member since Nov 2012
3205 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


To prove you can destroy it

I as of yet have no clue what's wron with it. So school me, I beg you






Back to top
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


Good grief dude, can't you see the difference between providing amelioration to people for the inevitable imbalances that occur in the economy--often through no fault of people's own--and enforcing some dystopia of total equality?





Back to top
MrTide33
Alabama Fan
Southeastern Central North America
Member since Nov 2012
3205 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


Marx was not as limited as you I dont believe, and some people through no fault of their own make less money, yes. My point, however, is that when people work hard to earn something, they get pissed when it's taken away from them by the government and given to somebody else, especially if they're not working. Lack of morale at the top lowers the average in an ever-spiraling downward cycle





Back to top
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


I pay taxes like you, and it doesn't make me work any less.

Anyway, I don't think you understand Marx, not that I'm a Marxist. The point was not that everyone had the same stuff and the same income--the point was that the divide between property-owners and laborers was abolished. That's really the essence of the thing.






Back to top
MrTide33
Alabama Fan
Southeastern Central North America
Member since Nov 2012
3205 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

I pay taxes like you, and it doesn't make me work any less.


Will it not change if taxes get higher and higher?

quote:

the point was that the divide between property-owners and laborers was abolished.


Well in this case, there's not a whole ton of people in America that don't own property unless they live on family's prperty. I just don't see how redistributing wealth is a good thing. Most people in a capitalist economy should earn what the receive, and receive what they earn






Back to top
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


Yes, I suppose it would in the alternative american universe where people are taxed to the point where they don't want to work.

I was writing in 19th-century terms. Business owners, the folks who hold capital, not just any old person who owns stuff.






Back to top
MrTide33
Alabama Fan
Southeastern Central North America
Member since Nov 2012
3205 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

I was writing in 19th-century terms. Business owners, the folks who hold capital, not just any old person who owns stuff.


Oh, alright. I gotcha.

quote:

Yes, I suppose it would in the alternative american universe where people are taxed to the point where they don't want to work.


Or just not work as hard. I know when I feel underpaid, it makes me want to not work as thouroughly. It's like the obamaphone lady. It sort of pisses me off that I had to give about 13 hours of work to pay for just my cell phone (service not included), and had to pay for hers with my taxes.






Back to top
Bayou Sam
LSU Fan
Snake and Jake's Christmas Club
Member since Aug 2009
5137 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


How many hours do you figure you worked for "her obamaphone"?





Back to top
  Replies (0)
DCRebel
Georgetown Fan
An office somewhere
Member since Aug 2009
17644 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

What is a fiscal centrist?


Centrist in the American model of politics.

I agree with Obama in that, if we are truly going to be committed to eliminating the federal deficit, we are going to have to increase tax revenues. I agree with the Republicans, notably Paul Ryan (in principle, not methods) that we will also need to greatly reform our entitlement programs to achieve that end.

So I believe in both higher taxes AND reduced federal spending as a method of reducing or eliminating the federal deficit.

quote:

What are the individual rights that govt needs to protect?


That's the question, isn't it? I'm not sure it has a universal answer, but in the US we've outlined our rights as they are outlined in the Constitution. You're surely familiar with those.

quote:

3. What functions beyond that should it operate properly?



Social welfare, defense, consumer protectionism, education, etc.

quote:

There was NOTHING about RR tax decreases that were Keynesian.


Yes they were. You clearly don't understand what Keynesian means.

Lowering taxes with the intent of manipulating the economy IS very much Keynesian! Keynes was really the first economy who wrote that the government had a role or responsibility in the maintenance of a national economy. In that sense, he basically invented what we call macroeconomics.

So, yes, saying "we will lower taxes because it would be a government policy that benefits the American economy" is a Keynesian policy. You, and many on this board, seem to conflate Keynesianism with simple government spending, which is simply not accurate.

quote:

Another example of M.E. Obama = Reagan.


You're the one that keeps brining up morals. Where have I said anything about "morals"? I'm simply pointing out that Obama is not vastly different than many other predecessors. That's not "moral equivalency" in a vacuum. I guess it could be "moral equivalency" if you first define Obama as immoral.

quote:

Already proved that. His life.



Okay, how so? I'm not seeing it. Maybe there's something that I simply don't know. Please enlighten me.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
DCRebel
Georgetown Fan
An office somewhere
Member since Aug 2009
17644 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:


The Founders and Framers created a nation-state whose central government was confined to the specifically enumerated authority and functions granted by the US Constitution.

Obama and today's Dem Party reject those limitations on FedGov authority and function. That is to say, more specifically, they reject the philosophy of governance bequeathed to us by the Founders and Framers.

As such, Obama and today's Dem Party embrace a philosophy of governance that is alien to that of the Founders and Framers.



The problem is that this makes the assumption that the founding fathers would, in today's context, make the exact same decisions they made in the 18th Century.

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." - Thomas Jefferson

They most certainly expected the nation they founded to evolve. By allowing for constitutional amendments, legislative assemblies, and checks and balances, they ensured that the United States would change if and when necessary, but only gradually so and only with electoral support.

quote:

Obama and today's Dem Party reject those limitations on FedGov authority and function.


And I'm not so sure this is the case. The only case, literally the ONLY case, I can think of right now that may support this claim is the healthcare mandate, but even then I'm not entirely sure that is some unprecedented use of federal power.

I mean, you don't volunteer your income tax, do you?






Back to top
DCRebel
Georgetown Fan
An office somewhere
Member since Aug 2009
17644 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

Will it not change if taxes get higher and higher?



Yes. It's called the Laffer curve.

That's why the tax rate isn't 99%. It is where it is for a reason. It doesn't keep people from working and it still generates significant federal revenue.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Champagne
New Orleans Saints Fan
French and Spanish Empire Border
Member since Oct 2007
12540 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

Rather, an interpretation of the document has to be made on a clear line of legal reasoning.



How much "legal reasoning" is necessary to understand that the Framers' foremost fear was that the Constitution would create a central govt with unbridled authority to intrude too greatly upon individual liberty? Their writings make this point very clearly.

And now? What have we now? A FedGov that is a Leviathan. How did this happen? Through "legal reasoning", of course! The Constitution has been so interpreted as to sweep away the original firewalls that contained FedGov's authority and function. Seems probable that there are no more limits on FedGov's authority. Time will tell.

And as for the ridiculous notion that some legal principle was settled in the 19th Century, let me point out that the Court has flip-flopped on well-settled law on many occasions throughout history.

At some point in the future, We the People will understand that we must elect people who will reverse the so-called "well-settled law" that gave FedGov such power; power that the Framers never intended it to possess.



This post was edited on 11/16 at 10:22 am


Back to top
Champagne
New Orleans Saints Fan
French and Spanish Empire Border
Member since Oct 2007
12540 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

It's the 21st century.


What is the point of this non sequitur?






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Champagne
New Orleans Saints Fan
French and Spanish Empire Border
Member since Oct 2007
12540 posts

re: When are more people going to start accepting Obama is a Marxist?


quote:

The problem is that this makes the assumption that the founding fathers would, in today's context, make the exact same decisions they made in the 18th Century.


Well, of course, it's a good thing for you to present your argument contrary to mine. I'll consider it carefully.

However, what keeps me from being persuaded is the fact that the Framers were so very wary of a powerful FedGov. I simply can't be persuaded that they would one day abandon this bedrock principle of theirs and accept the Leviathan FedGov that we have today.

FedGov is spending the USA into oblivion. This current philosophy of governance that allows FedGov to continue to do this is proving to be destructive. No way that the Framers would say, "Yep, this is a good thing. We now see that Constitutional limits on FedGov power and function are undesirable here in the 21st Century."

If things were working well today, perhaps one could argue that the Framers would approve of this view of FedGov function, but, things are not working very well. As such, I'm not persuaded that Framers alive today would approve of our abandonment of Constitutional limits on FedGov authority and function.

But, I have contributed to the hi-jacking of this thread. To address the OP: Obama is not a "strict constructionist" Marxist, that's for sure. He embraces collectivist/Statist/re-distributive policies. It's convenient, but, technically careless, to call that "Marxist."



This post was edited on 11/16 at 10:27 am


Back to top


Back to top