Obama Decries American Dream
Over the weekend President Obama for the umpteenth time demonized the free-market system by attempting to convince people with his failing message that if you created a business, you didn't with your blood, sweat and tears. Others had a hand in it and your hard work was only secondary to the people that you met along the way.
Spitting in the face of small business owners, the naive President of the United States completely disregarded the immigrants of old that came to America (and continue to do so) and built their lives and businesses from nothing, as we've all heard many times, with nothing more than perhaps ten dollars in their pocket. The teachers and otherwise helpful influences-government not being one of them, in fact most times being a hindrance in their accumulation of wealth-that had no hand in the business decisions that created their dreams and for many business empires, may receive accolades from these business owners themselves for teaching them how to travel the road of success; but that certainly doesn't mean they had a hand in laying the pavement down that built that road. The government may open up avenues and at times remove roadblocks that ease your way to business success with deregulation and tax cuts, but not the way Obama would have you do it. I would like the president to explain to the descendants of generational family-owned businesses that started with a determined hard-working immigrant off the boat at Ellice Island how the government keeps the food being delivered to their table.
Ace of Spades also has a good take on these pandering shenanigans:
One of the key traits of the left is that its political positions are almost always emotion-based rather than reasoned out from a set of principles. There may be intellectual arguments for their policies but they're almost always tacked on long after fact to justify a position that feels right. So it's natural that they will try to sell a position using the same quality that makes it so appealing to them.
One shared quality among humans (and some apes) is that we all have a built-in sense of fairness in our brains - or to be more accurate a keen detector of unfairness. And leftists use this unfairness sensor all the time when they're promoting forms of wealth redistribution e.g. it's *unfair* that the rich have so many boats and houses when there are working people who can't feed their families.
By re-framing a situation into an 'unfair' narrative they're trying to activate people's anti-unfairness brain circuitry to get them to emotionally accept the proposed solutions to make things 'fair' again. Now this works fairly often but it's certainly not the magic bullet that leftists believe it is. In particular it only works if the proposed 'fairness' solution doesn't itself also activate the unfairness-detector.
Now Americans generally admire people who've built up their own successful businesses through hard work, investment of money and huge amounts of time - so much so that this is a key component of the American Dream. So when politicians talk about making these businesses - particularly small ones - pay much higher taxes and fees, it also seems unfair that those who've made risks and worked very hard to build something should be the very ones to be singled out to have more of their earned wealth taken away. That also sets the unfairness neurons a-twitchin'.
The left knows this which is why they're always looking for some way to disqualify and devalue the achievements of successful entrepreneurs. So it's no surprise that both Elizabeth Warren and Obama (using nearly the same words) claim that no one really builds a business by themselves - it's really the result of government help, the work of other people, and plain luck.
Then it follows that business owners don't fully deserve their financial gains either and thus it's completely reasonable to make them share it with others. So taking more from the successful is now the truly fair thing to do.
Of course their no-one-is-really-independently-successful argument is wrong for a host of reasons but now you know why they're making it in the first place.
Spitting in the face of small business owners, the naive President of the United States completely disregarded the immigrants of old that came to America (and continue to do so) and built their lives and businesses from nothing, as we've all heard many times, with nothing more than perhaps ten dollars in their pocket. The teachers and otherwise helpful influences-government not being one of them, in fact most times being a hindrance in their accumulation of wealth-that had no hand in the business decisions that created their dreams and for many business empires, may receive accolades from these business owners themselves for teaching them how to travel the road of success; but that certainly doesn't mean they had a hand in laying the pavement down that built that road. The government may open up avenues and at times remove roadblocks that ease your way to business success with deregulation and tax cuts, but not the way Obama would have you do it. I would like the president to explain to the descendants of generational family-owned businesses that started with a determined hard-working immigrant off the boat at Ellice Island how the government keeps the food being delivered to their table.
Ace of Spades also has a good take on these pandering shenanigans:
One of the key traits of the left is that its political positions are almost always emotion-based rather than reasoned out from a set of principles. There may be intellectual arguments for their policies but they're almost always tacked on long after fact to justify a position that feels right. So it's natural that they will try to sell a position using the same quality that makes it so appealing to them.
One shared quality among humans (and some apes) is that we all have a built-in sense of fairness in our brains - or to be more accurate a keen detector of unfairness. And leftists use this unfairness sensor all the time when they're promoting forms of wealth redistribution e.g. it's *unfair* that the rich have so many boats and houses when there are working people who can't feed their families.
By re-framing a situation into an 'unfair' narrative they're trying to activate people's anti-unfairness brain circuitry to get them to emotionally accept the proposed solutions to make things 'fair' again. Now this works fairly often but it's certainly not the magic bullet that leftists believe it is. In particular it only works if the proposed 'fairness' solution doesn't itself also activate the unfairness-detector.
Now Americans generally admire people who've built up their own successful businesses through hard work, investment of money and huge amounts of time - so much so that this is a key component of the American Dream. So when politicians talk about making these businesses - particularly small ones - pay much higher taxes and fees, it also seems unfair that those who've made risks and worked very hard to build something should be the very ones to be singled out to have more of their earned wealth taken away. That also sets the unfairness neurons a-twitchin'.
The left knows this which is why they're always looking for some way to disqualify and devalue the achievements of successful entrepreneurs. So it's no surprise that both Elizabeth Warren and Obama (using nearly the same words) claim that no one really builds a business by themselves - it's really the result of government help, the work of other people, and plain luck.
Then it follows that business owners don't fully deserve their financial gains either and thus it's completely reasonable to make them share it with others. So taking more from the successful is now the truly fair thing to do.
Of course their no-one-is-really-independently-successful argument is wrong for a host of reasons but now you know why they're making it in the first place.
posted by Northern Exposer at 22:37
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home