Barack Obama’s Wealth Redistribution: Is It A Good Plan?

PinExt Barack Obamas Wealth Redistribution: Is It A Good Plan?

“My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” ~ Barack Obama

Wealth redistribution is a subject that I just don’t get.  Maybe somebody can explain it to me.  How is it fair to take money from people that have rightfully earned it and give it to others who did nothing for it?  Will this really improve anything?  Apparently, Barack Obama thinks so.

new dollar thumb Barack Obamas Wealth Redistribution: Is It A Good Plan? I know that I’m venturing off into dangerous territory here because many will think that I’m slipping off into politics.  I’m really not.  This has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans.  I really just want to make the point that we are not a socialistic society.  I want to protect our individual right to earn and give our money as we see fit. 

We are empathetic to people’s needs, but the majority in this country have always believed in the basic premise that “if you want to eat, you should work.”  Is it callous and cold-hearted to believe people should pull their own weight?

The government should not redistribute our wealth

Doesn’t it scare you even a little to think that our government could get involved to a larger degree in spreading our money to others?  I mean we already do this in a lot of ways. 

All social programs including social security, unemployment, and welfare collect your money in the form of taxes and then redistribute it to others.  Generally, helping a neighbor down on his luck or that has worked and contributed to the common good his entire life is not a bad thing.  However, doesn’t it seem we have created a whole segment of the population that feels entitled to these benefits now?  I’m not a fan of creating more of the same.

I don’t think we want to pay the 40% plus tax rates that are found in many countries that use the wealth redistribution approach.  This is the way it is in countries like Germany, Belgium and Denmark where they have universal healthcare and many other such programs.  Is this really what we want?

Of course, a large part of our taxes are spent on good things.  The government uses much of our tax dollars to pay for things like roads, the military, law enforcement, etc.  These programs benefit us all and I’m sure we want to continue these.  I’m certainly not against working together for a better country.  Again, I just think we all need to pull our own load.  Is this wrong?

I don’t see why a person that has spent their blood, sweat and tears building up a business over his/her lifetime should now be penalized because they’ve accumulated a nice income and a pile of cash in the bank.  Is my thinking wrong on this?

It is not wrong to be rich!

Where did some people get the idea that it is wrong to accumulate wealth?  The power, influence, and status this country has enjoyed for many years is largely a result of our wealth.  Having the freedom to own land and be rich is a right that we fought to get.

I know that some people have gone wrong and become overly greedy.  I don’t like hearing about CEOs of failing companies getting rich off the deal anymore than anyone else does.  However, we deserve a reminder that people at all economic levels make mistakes and fall to greed.  There is no reason to throw out the baby with the bath water!  There are some very generous rich people out there doing good things with their money.  It isn’t wrong to have wealth or want it, is it?

I don’t understand why some people automatically think negatively of people that have money.  Money is not dirty.  It is not wrong to have it.  Could the problem be envy?  I know I have thought negatively of others just because I was jealous of what they’ve achieved.  Of course, this is no reason that their stuff should be taken from them and given to me.  Do you think rich people deserve some sort of economic penalty for their achievement?

Let’s encourage people to work and build businesses

There is still opportunity in America to work and achieve success.  It is still possible to succeed by starting with hardly anything and without knowing anyone of influence.  It just takes work. 

The problem is that many people do not want to work.  Doesn’t it seem like they’d rather wait for the government to take care of them?  Why should my hard earned money be taken from me via programs that I don’t agree with and given to others that aren’t working?  Will this really lead to a better America?

It seems to me that instead of redistributing wealth, we should be encouraging people to start their own businesses.  We should give breaks to the regular guy that shows up from 9 to 5 everyday of his life and works hard to put food on the table for his family.  This is the majority of America.

We are a country of people that aren’t afraid to work.  We are innovative, resourceful, and proud.  In fact, I hope we are still too proud to take undeserved handouts.  I hope we still believe in an honest day’s wages for an honest day’s work.  I hope we still believe in the freedoms we have fought so hard to get.  No matter who we elect as President, I hope we choose to preserve the opportunities that have made America great!

“If there is anything which it is the duty of the whole people to never entrust to any hands but their own — that thing is the preservation of their own liberties and institutions.” ~ Abraham Lincoln

What am I missing about Senator Obama’s plan to spread the wealth around?

Photo by Simon Davison

»crosslinked«

PinExt Barack Obamas Wealth Redistribution: Is It A Good Plan?

25 thoughts on “Barack Obama’s Wealth Redistribution: Is It A Good Plan?

  1. I live in Italy, and we have some sort of wealth compensation – which our government is trying to take away now.
    We have free basic medical care for everybody, social assistance for children, the elderly or poor people, and I’m frankly proud of this.
    If you happen to be in a bad period and don’t have anybody to count on (and this is the case in Italy now for many people) you know you have access to the basic things you may need without relying on private insurance or things like that.
    So there is nothing “wrong” about getting rich – or even wealthy – wealth distribution just a way to think of the less fortunate.

    Read Elisa´s lastest article – Etsy find – a Heart Pendant by Boo Jewels

  2. “I really just want to make the point that we are not a socialistic society. I want to protect our individual right to earn and give our money as we see fit.
    We are empathetic to people’s needs, but the majority in this country have always believed in the basic premise that “if you want to eat, you should work.””

    Maybe in certain countries with a past of comunist fobia certain ideas just sound too scary, but you should remember that most wealthy people are not wealthy because of their hard work. There may be people with 100x more money than a given cab driver/builder/plumber, but does that mean that they work 100x as hard? Really? What about people who start a business and it goes wrong? Are they lazy people who expect to eat for free?
    Most rich people come from rich families that got rich and wealthy a few generations back. Or you’re going to tell me that Paris Hilton has spent her blood, sweat and tears to earn her money… No, it’s not her hard work what’s made her rich.

    And of course rich people don’t want to pay high taxes. NOBODY wants to pay taxes. NOBODY wants to pay anything! BUT you should want universal healthcare. I really don’t get why, if I lived in the US, should Paris have the right to get medical procedures and not me because I couldn’t afford them. I work my butt off every day! Maybe I should have studied something I didn’t like, I shouldn’t have followed my dream, just to make enough to get surgery if I need it. I’d be unhappy my whole life, yes, but I’d make sure I’d be taken care of if I get sick.

    In a socialistic society people do not lose their right to earn and give as they wish, nor do they disregard the premise that you have to work in order to achieve wealth.

    But, we do have a much better standard to start with. We know we all have access to the health system through the social security. All of us. If you need super sofisticated surgery, you get it. You have the same right to get the operation wether you’re a cab driver or a banker or an unemployed student.

    I pay around 250€/month to the social security system. That entitles me to any kind of health care I may need, no matter how many days I have to stay in the hospital, or how complicated is the treatment, or whatever. Oh, and I’ll get a pension when I retire. Oh, and you know what? Here nobody has student loans. Why? Because the State funds the college education system, and a typical year in a University here is around 800€. And no one would say we’re not getting proper training.

    And this is all to say, that maybe rich people feel that all they have belongs to them and they don’t want to give anything and whatever. But it’s nice to belong to a society where you all contribute to the GROUP’s wellbeing. You won’t cease to be rich just because you pay higher taxes. But you may live in a nicer, more relaxed, happier society.

    Read Gracia´s lastest article – We’re back!

  3. @Elisa – I see your point and I really do want everyone to get medical attention when they need it. However, I’m still not sure Mr. Obama’s plan is right for this country. For me, I think it goes too far.

    @Gracia – I sense a little hostility in your comment toward those with money. We all make choices in our lives. I admire your choice to pursue a career that is fulfilling even though you probably knew ahead of time that it wouldn’t earn you as much money. However, that was your choice. Maybe there was a way that you could have been happy AND earned a better income. I still don’t see why money should be taken from someone else and given to those pursuing their dream. I don’t feel I should have to subsidize your choices.

    In America, we already have most of the social benefits that you mention in your comment as well. We have a social security system that is a basic pension for everyone. Also, everyone that needs critical medical attention gets it. I’m just against further government intervention. As I mentioned, we already pay taxes that go toward everyone’s common good, but I don’t like the sense of entitlement that it seems many are adopting.

    It is interesting to hear how these things work in other countries! Thanks for the thoughtful comments!

  4. I think people get hung up on the words “spread the wealth.” The goal of Senator Obama’s plan is to change the percentages that apply to different tax brackets. Over the last 8 years the US Government has been reducing the percentages that the upper quintiles pay. In essence flattening the tax structure. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it has definitely helped create the massive deficits that we are seeing now.

    In my opinion it boils down to balancing the budget. You either spend less or collect more. (Preferably both.) Senator Obama’s plan is to collect more from the people that have more money, and give a tax break to the middle class. The hope is that the middle class will spend more here in the US and give our GDP a boost. That theoretically will send more money to small businesses — which are mostly run by the people in the upper quintiles. Almost a trickle up theory.

    You sound like you’ve made up your mind already, but if it’s still a little open, there are lots of websites out there that seek to clarify this issue. Starting with Senator Obama’s.

  5. @Lewis – I really am still trying to understand all this. Although none of us want higher taxes, I do believe we need to be more fiscally responsible. We need to pay down our debt and at least come closer to balancing the budget.

    I’m still skeptical of Senator Obama’s plan, but if he gets elected, I sure hope it works. It sounds logical as you’ve presented it and maybe there are parts that are worth trying. I just want to maintain some balance. We may have swung too far one way already, but let’s not swing back to the other and penalize those that have worked hard their entire lives to build what they have.

    Thanks for explaining this so clearly!

  6. I think this “spread the wealth” is being used for fear. I don’t think it’s so much taking a high earner’s money and giving it to a lower wage person. It’s about having everyone pay their share of the taxes. Let’s look at Warren Buffet’s argument: He pays a smaller percentage of taxes than his secretary. Thus his secretary is shouldering a higher percentage of taxes. People with higher incomes have better access to tax shelters and tax advice. I’m not a fan of taxes but we do need them. And we need to be more responsible with what is done with the money as well.
    Let’s look at the bailouts: isn’t this wealth distribution? Except it could be seen as taking from the poor to give to the rich. Is that right? I know that the answer isn’t black and white but it’s something to think about when people criticize so called wealth distribution.
    And wanna know what I think about the candidates plans? I think think that regardless of who gets elected we’ll be paying taxes! There’s just so much happening with the war and the economy that I don’t think it can be helped. My hope is that the person who wins will be able to use the money well to both help the people and grow the economy.

    Read FFB´s lastest article – Federal Funds Rate And Your Savings

  7. @FFB – In a political campaign, both sides use fear and stretch the truth. I’m sure this is being stretched and sensationalized by the McCain campaign to try to sway voters. Of course, the Obama campaign obviously has done the same in their own way. It is often hard to discern the truth. I’m glad that I posted this article because it is helping me to see both sides.

    I think most Americans would be willing to share the tax burden if they felt the money would really be used responsibly. However, is it possible that we are already paying enough taxes, but that the money just isn’t being used as wisely as it could be?

    The bailouts were definitely pushed through by both parties using fear. I wasn’t a fan of those either. Again, I feel like individuals and companies should be fiscally responsible for their own well-being. Obviously, these issues aren’t completely black and white.

    I think we all hope the plans of whoever is elected next week work out for the betterment of the country. I know we can all at least agree on that!

    Great comment! Let’s hear some more opinions!

  8. What makes me enormously envious about the Europeans who don’t live under this system is precisely their access to health care. Gracia’s paying 250 Euros for her health care and pension? So that’s about 311 bucks, right? With my husband’s new job, we’re now paying $294 just for health coverage. This is HALF the cost of his last job, which was just over $500 a month. It seems to me, that one way or another you’re paying– so what difference does it make whether it’s a tax or an employer deduction?

    One difference is this– he was laid off in September, so we could pay for COBRA, although with what funds, I’m not sure, because it cost more than the unemployment insurance paid. He had some decent ideas of businesses he wanted us to try to start, but his medical history makes him uninsurable on the open market in the U.S. (At least for any affordable amount.) So there’s one man with a huge desire to actually start a business, which might eventually create jobs for other people… but he kept looking for another job. The simple hard truth that we must have health insurance.

    This isn’t re-distributing wealth to me. These are costs you pay one way or the other. And the costs of insurance keep going up. How is this keeping our country healthy? I have a friend who finished her degree in Scotland, while her husband kept working as a tele-commuting independent contractor– and they did this in Scotland because they also wanted that luxury of health insurance. Because in America, you can’t do those things all at once.

    And you can’t lose your job either. Or start a business. Or go back to school full time. The whole system stinks.

    Read Melanie´s lastest article – oh my goodness.. it’s Erin Hunter

  9. Jeff, I recently wrote a post on this very topic and shared your overall views. However, I referenced a graphic from the Economist that does show America has by far the biggest wealth and income distribution amongst developed countries (with the top 10% controlling about 80% of the national wealth). So while Obama is also playing politics by targetting the majority of people (90%), I also feel that by spreading the wealth we have the best chance to drive broad based consumer spending and get America out of the economic slump it is in.

    Read Andy´s lastest article – Health Care Plans: 10 Tips on Choosing the Right Option

  10. @Melanie – I empathize with your situation, but I’m not sure more socialism is the answer. We tried HMOs in this country and they did not work. Universal healthcare seems like a big government run HMO to me. Do you want an agency similar to the bureaucracy of the Social Security Administration or the Internal Revenue Service making decisions about when and where your family gets medical treatment? I don’t.

    I agree that our system is not perfect and yes we do end up paying for other’s inability to pay in various ways, but I still enjoy freedom of choice. As you say, we are paying one way or another so how is more socialism going to help? It only creates more government.

    There is an enormous amount of opportunity in this country. If not, then why are so many people from other nations still trying to immigrate here? Also, it seems that there are a ton of success stories of how people from other countries come here without anything only to build a successful business in just a few years.

    It seems that many natural born Americans often don’t want to make the sacrifices needed to achieve such success. They want the government to take care of them instead. They want to use the proceeds of others that have already paid the price to pay their way. No thanks!

  11. The middle class is what keeps America running, and they deserve a break. It is the middle class who are bearing the brunt of the economy–homes being foreclosed, losing their jobs with minimal severance, facing the scary possibility of going into huge debt if they get sick. Why is it fine for someone making a million dollars a year to pay less taxes than someone making $30,000 a year? That is the problem. If you make more, you can afford to pay more taxes.

    Those programs you don’t agree with are there for safety. And, as have been reported, are being taken advantage of by people who have come on a hard time. Yes, as you wrote, there are some greedy wealthy people, just like there are some greedy poor people who use these programs. That’s life.

    The middle class has been slaughtered by Bush’s tax plan–which favors big business, the super rich, and people who think money is the sole meaning of their existence. They need a break, and I’m in favor.

    Selfishness is a disease. And it’s the worst entitlement of all. We all have benefited from everyone’s taxation in some form. In an ideal world, people wouldn’t even write an article decrying wealth redistribution, it’d be voluntary. But this is not an ideal world, it’s a diverse one, with millions of circumstances, troubles, and problems.

    How can we get the wheels of this society moving again? By giving the middle class a much needed break, giving them health care, and taking some of their financial worry away. There is nothing wrong with money or being wealthy, but there is something wrong with selfishness. There are people who work just as hard as a wealthy person, probably even more, and they are paying more taxes. The wealthy person’s blood, sweat, and tears have not fallen any harder than a non-wealthy person.

  12. ANY form of government is a redistribution of wealth. Granted, the terminology Obama used is not exactly helping his cause, but the system currently in place by the republicans is also a redistribution…only upwards. Wall Street’s bailout is a perfect example of how the average person is now paying into the “success” of these tycoons. I believe we like to call these externalities. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against being wealthy or being personally responsible, but I do believe that there is a certain responsibility to give back to the community that allowed you to be successful in the first place. If you have no employees, you can’t have a company. Their ability to sustain a certain quality of life enables them to continue to work for you in their greatest capacity, and not have to work 3 jobs and therefore give you a smaller cut of their brain power and commitment. Even Adam Smith allowed some room for this concept. When you argue for the rich being the sole source of a countries’ success, you are being somewhat naive as to the social structure that allows that success to even take place.

    From Adam Smith:

    “The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”

  13. @Katie – We both agree that the middle class is the backbone of America. However, I think where we differ is that you feel the government is the entity that is going to help. I am a middle class American and I’d rather not have to count on the government to take care of me. I don’t think I’m paying higher taxes now than I was under the Clinton Administration. Don’t you remember the tax rebate stimulus check mailed to you this year? Also, how is it selfish for me to want to decide myself where and when to give my money? I just want to retain this freedom instead of having the government do it for me.

    @Deb – I agree that all government is redistribution of wealth. I did mention in my article that much of our tax money is used for good things we all want. I’m not against this. However, I am against taking from some that earn their money and giving it to those that do not.

    Also, isn’t it possible that by taxing successful small business owners at a higher rate that it might reduce the number of jobs they can offer? What would this do to the employee’s quality of life?

    I’m very impressed with all your well thought out comments! Thanks for expressing your opinions!

  14. @Jeff: That is what government is for! They are there to help the people, to keep the country running, to make the laws, to keep things in check. You’d rather not have to count on the government to help you, but it will be there just in case you do. One never knows what circumstances one can get into. Some will have family and friends to help them out of a tough situation, but what about people who don’t? Just because you have no use for something doesn’t mean it should not be. And you’re pretty naive if you think you have control over were your money goes—you don’t.

    The small business argument has been flogged to death, and explained just as much. 98% of small businesses will not pay higher taxes, but that doesn’t matter because—in the mind of some—the remaining two percent will. And that is the main problem, no one wants to look out for the majority, only the elite, the privileged few deserve breaks. Enough.

  15. Redistribution of wealth is another way of saying “taxes.” That’s what taxes are – we’ll always have tax, so making them fair and appropriate is a good thing.

  16. I agree with everyone who has commented so far, except you Jeff. :-) I especially liked what Elisa said. I’m both a Canadian and American citizen and love both countries. But I love the way Canada takes care of poor and. I’m very proud of our social programs to help the less fortunate. The struggling people I know work every bit as hard as the richer. They simply didn’t have as many props to help them get established as well in early adulthood. They will spend their lives struggling and it’s not because of laziness.

    You said,”There is an enormous amount of opportunity in this country. If not, then why are so many people from other nations still trying to immigrate here? Also, it seems that there are a ton of success stories of how people from other countries come here without anything only to build a successful business in just a few years.” I point out that the people immigrating to North America do not come from countries where there are social programs to aid them. People from Denmark, Canada, and other “socialistic” countries see their country as superior. Those advantages are precisely why the League of Nations voted these countries as the best places in the world to live. The US is a ways down on the list and it’s because of the lack of wealth distribution.

    Many come looking for greater opportunity and thankfully they find it. But those people are usually coming from poorer countries.

    I feel very blessed to be doing ok financially. We live simply, but we live well. I am very willing to pay high taxes to help my neighbor who works 12 hours a day as a cab driver trying to take care of his family. Frustrating to see the lazy guy drawing a gov’t check? Absolutely. But I prefer his cheating the system than the poor, elderly, and sick doing without the basics.

    Great food for thought Jeff. Thanks.

    Read valerie´s lastest article – Psalm 23

  17. Obama’s “redistribution” is hardly growing the size of government – at least, not in comparison to the Bush Administration. Under the Bush administration the government has grown a larger percentage than any time since the Depression. The largest non-military expenditures are Medicare & Medicaid. This has all been funded by deficit spending. Obama is trying to balance the budget.

    To reiterate on Katie Chin’s point, 98% of small businesses will see no increase in their taxes. Obama’s health care plan is NOT socialized medicine. It’s improving on existing systems – giving tax benefits to people for buying health insurance, and enlarging the existing high risk pool that the government already uses (COBRA) in order to lower cost. Small businesses that choose not to offer health insurance would pay a fee to help lower the cost on that high risk pool.

    It’s true that someone will need to oversee this system, but it will fall to existing agencies like the IRS to ensure that this is running smoothly.

    Socialism is an unfortunate word that has too much negativity tied to it. Obama’s plan is not socialism or redistribution in the traditional sense of the word. It is merely expanding on existing systems.

    Read cory huff´s lastest article – Husbands & Dads Refer a Friend Contest Update

  18. Rich is okay. Wealthy is fine. Comfortable is good. But 1% of the population has 25% of the wealth. And they did not get it by working hard. They stole it. We want it back.

    The trick they play is that they invite everyone to work hard and try to get rich, but they (the exuberantly wealthy) are just pulling you along.

    Wake up.

    Read Steven Robert Smith´s lastest article – Your Ultimatum

  19. Take it back? Take it back? It wasn’t stolen, it was willingly given by you to purchase goods and services from business owners. The economic and financial ignorance I’m seeing is only surpassed by the class envy and lack of understanding history and human psychology.

    We have the highest standard of living in the world and it isn’t because we “spread the wealth.” It’s exactly the opposite. We encouraged the justice that comes from hard work. Just how much of YOUR wealth are you willing to let the government spread around?

    Ask yourself one question: when has Obama EVER cut taxes? He’s letting the Bush tax cuts expire but refuses to say that it’s a tax increase. He cannot be trusted.

    And on Warren Buffet…give me a break. He has no earned income. It’s all capital gains.

    Read Ron@TheWisdomJournal´s lastest article – Standard of Living: The Next Bubble To Pop?

  20. Written by Jim Cardoza at Liberty Pen:

    The concept of socialism, or economic justice, is widely taught in our schools as the natural evolution of a compassionate society. Politicians like to peddle the notion as a means of achieving fairness or equality. But, it never works out that way—unless making everyone equally poor was the goal. The whole scheme is nothing more than using Peter’s money to buy Paul’s vote.

    Those duped into investing in the moral stance of socialism should consider the following. If I stick a gun in your ribs and demand your money, I have clearly committed theft. Yet, a socialist will perpetrate that same act and, merely because a politician is substituted for the gun, claim moral high ground. The fact is, the act is identical, only the legal status changed.

    Free market economics, or voluntary exchange, is the exact opposite of socialism. It is a system in complete accord with the principles of liberty. Free markets encourage cooperation, risk-taking and innovation, while rewarding success and achievement.

    No matter how selfish their motive, players in the free market must serve their fellow man with products and services so valuable, customers will willingly exchange their money. In order for any transaction to occur, it must be seen as mutually beneficial. The typical result is to satisfy the parties involved.

    By contrast, when politicians and bureaucrats make decisions in our behalf, as socialists advocate, another set of dynamics come in to play. Since bureaucrats are not dealing with their own money, there is little motivation to get value for the dollars they spend. And, with decision makers largely insulated from the consequences of their actions, our satisfaction with the transactions they make in our behalf become hardly a consideration at all.

    The temptation may be strong to accept the popular class warfare notions promoted by pandering politicians and their relentless media allies—that the rich attained their wealth by exploiting the poor. It then follows that unless we empower a modern day Robin Hood, individuals have no chance at prosperity.

    But, citizens beware. While Robin Hood was a community organizer of sorts, he was a fierce enemy of the tyrants atop a powerful, central government. While Barack Obama wants you to believe that he is a new Robin Hood, a close inspection of his beliefs show a far greater resemblance to the Sheriff of Nottingham.

    Economic liberty is a fundamental element of political liberty. It is the cornerstone principle from which the American Dream has been built. By trading it in for a false and immoral view of fairness, Americans will do nothing short of squandering their precious right to self-determination.

    Read Ron@TheWisdomJournal´s lastest article – Standard of Living: The Next Bubble To Pop?

  21. Pingback: Friday Link Love - Haunted Play-Doh Edition | One Caveman's Financial Journey

  22. Ron, have you missed what happened in the Iraq war…palletes of cash went missing. That’s just one little example. And letting a short-term tax cut expire is not raising taxes.

    I own no envy of excessively wealthy thieves. I own terror for my son and his sons because of the plight our world is in.

    Too bad we don’t have capitalism. I’m a big fan of it. We have elitist, government-sanctioned socialism that cycles money among the elite is not capitalism. Nor does it exist in cities where public systems are allowed profit margins or excessive pay for executive officers. No, Qwest tells me how much I pay, or I don’t get to type this. There is no capitalistic balancing of scales.

    Though you sound defensive in your comment, I like your vision in your article: that we risk everything by cranking up credit. We do. I like real wealth, not pretend wealth (which, by the way is another foible of the excessively wealthy…they own lots of numbers!).

  23. I believe that wealth redistribution is not a intelligent idea that a president should have we all should be learning to work and scarifice for our wealth/income I worked hard to get what small income I have coming in, I don’t have a job and am in the process of trying to find one, I have not gone up to someone rich and said gimme money I know in order to survive and learn diligent spending I have to work hard for what little income I get. SOCIALIST IS COMMUNIST (it’s just different words but has the same meaning). If you don’t work hard you shouldn’t get the wealth, most wealthy people or their families worked hard to get where they are today. If the rest of the country got their wealth no one would want to work and everyone would feel like they are entitled to everything without scarifice and hard work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

CommentLuv badge