Senator Harkin(D): Problem is Misallocation of Wealth, Not Spending

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by way2convey, Feb 15, 2013.

  1. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    This is ripe.
    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/harkin-it-spending-problem-no-its-misallocation-wealth

    So, when the fed takes in $5.6T, but spends $6.3T it isn't a spending problem? Oh no, according to Harkin, the problem is the fed hasn't "allocated" itself enough of the wealth. In other words, Harkin (like Obama and all progressives) believes the government needs to steal more earned wealth and "allocate" (redistribute) it accordingly, and presto, problem solved.
    But Harkin knows, as do all who pay attention, when government takes more out of the private sector it doesn't produce more wealth with it, it only spends it and then some. Washington is a hodge podge of bloated, redundant, unaccountable bureaucracy that's become more self-serving and powerful by the year with no end in sight. What Harkin is suggesting is federal government spending isn't a problem, it's above scrutiny and a problem only exists because they aren't controlling enough wealth to "allocate" it properly. It's pure progressive nonsense, but that's exactly what they are advocating. It's nothing new, but Obama put this idea on the fast track with his populist "war on the rich", "fair share", rhetoric and now we are facing this train head on. And, if Obama's team is successful in making free market capitalism the enemy in the minds of the American people instead of the greedy, elitist, unaccountable, authoritarian, irresponsible government, we're all in a world of hurt. And make no mistake, that's exactly what this is all about and has been for some time.
     
  2. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Give me a trillion dollars in specific spending cuts for the next fiscal year (not over ten or whatever Ryan's plan was).....right now.

    Oh and please throw in "Yet Another Tax Cut for the 'Jobs Creator'" and how we'll "grow out of deficits".....since that has worked so many times over the last 30 years. :)
     
  3. BestViewedWithCable

    BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    48,288
    Likes Received:
    6,966
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why dont dems just admit theyre commies?

    At this point, what difference would it make?
     
  4. DonGlock26

    DonGlock26 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    47,159
    Likes Received:
    1,179
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First, we take the riches of the congressmen. How's that sound, Harkin?
     
  5. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Why? No need to cut spending, right? It's only an allocation problem solved by tax increases. And, since under this regime government is the designated "Jobs Creator", tax increases, not cuts, are needed for that to work too. In other words, what we need to make our free market system work is less free market via more centralized control. Presto! Fairness baby, fairness!
     
  6. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Oh, they do, but not directly. You know, stepping out the closet stuff....it takes awhile for the narrative to reach a point they can muster the courage to "step out". But at least now, a few of them are honest enough to declare they're socialist. That's "progress", right?
     
  7. AceFrehley

    AceFrehley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,582
    Likes Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Perhaps you should address that to Barack Obama. He's the one who promised to go through the budget line by line to reduce and/or eliminate wasteful spending.
     
  8. Cubed

    Cubed Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2012
    Messages:
    17,964
    Likes Received:
    4,953
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's one thing I'd like to see.
     
  9. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL...don't hold your breath. Hell, they won't even seriously question Obama concerning the death of our Ambassador much less something as trival as another broken campaign promise.
     
  10. webrockk

    webrockk Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    25,361
    Likes Received:
    9,081
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "Misallocation of Wealth" translated: Central government control over a "planned economy"....or, to remove all pretense, "economic fascism"
     
  11. webrockk

    webrockk Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    25,361
    Likes Received:
    9,081
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Lol....while they pander to "free" birth control and the importance of PBS puppets.
     
  12. Gorn Captain

    Gorn Captain Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    35,580
    Likes Received:
    237
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Give me a trillion dollars in specific spending cuts......and please feel free to throw in another tax cut....

    and see if you can "make it work" without unicorns and elves.
     
  13. AceFrehley

    AceFrehley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,582
    Likes Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But you won't see it. It's becoming impossible to believe he's ever had any intention of cutting spending. There simply isn't any evidence of it- well, other than tokenism.
     
  14. AceFrehley

    AceFrehley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,582
    Likes Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why are making demands of anonymous posters on the internet, and giving a pass to the people in DC who can and should live up to their promises to fix George W. Bush's outrageous spending and deficits?
     
  15. freakonature

    freakonature Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    10,885
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did Bill Clinton need unicorns or elves? I will gladly agree to the Clinton era tax code in return for a return to the Clinton era spending. Agreed?
     
  16. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    LOL...you seem a little confused about the topic, so I'll give you a pass for the strawman BS.
     
  17. BestViewedWithCable

    BestViewedWithCable Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Messages:
    48,288
    Likes Received:
    6,966
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think Im gonna puke....
     
  18. TBryant

    TBryant Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    4,146
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    The allocation of wealth is a product of economic systems and government involvement. The two are tied so strongly together that if you balance the power more to one side or the other, the side the balance swings to starts to become the other. So if business becomes more powerful than government, business begins to take on governmental roles. If government becomes more powerful, it becomes enmeshed in business affairs. Its all about balance.

    Artificial allocation of wealth is not ideal. The best method government has is to create a level playing field. If they depend entirely on one part of their population to succeed and produce to support another people tend to resist. Everyone should be supporting themselves as much as possible but should also be encouraged to feel compassion for the less fortunate. There are only so many winners and it is illogical to assume that the vast majority, who do not reach the highest levels, fail exclusively because of unworthiness. There are any number of factors that create success, if you lack one of them it might make no difference or it might make all the difference in the world.

    Saying that everyone would be better off if government butted out is naive, for most people it would just be replacing one form of oppression with another.
     
  19. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BS. Unless you are forced to live in a company town, use company script, the company owns your home, etc. then you cannot claim oppression!

    Getting up and going to work in the morning and going to work for minimum wage is not oppression, it is a reflection of a lack of economically useful skills.

    We don't want those with no skills to make a lot of money, because as consumers we want the cheapest products possible. Just working 40 hours a week isn't enough!

    A guy who bags groceries at Walmart is a retard, and Americans don't cater to retards.
     
  20. AceFrehley

    AceFrehley New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Messages:
    8,582
    Likes Received:
    153
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would only want to clarify a bit about the "feel compassion" for part of your argument. We have too many people claiming to feel compassion for the less fortunate, yet propose someone else pay more to pay for that "compassion".
     
  21. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The government is just a tool of the wealthy elites in the first place, and has been totally responsible for the upward redistribution (misallocation) of wealth over the past 30 years. Don't blame the government. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the ruling class and, as such, has made theft totally legal.
     
  22. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If wealth is accruing at the top then that means failure by the lower parts of society to learn how to do more than bag groceries for a living.

    Grocery baggers simply are not economically useful enough to command a middle class living.
     
  23. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Correct. We need to tax those dollars before they are lost forever to Wall Street and the Caymans.
     
  24. SiliconMagician

    SiliconMagician Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2010
    Messages:
    18,921
    Likes Received:
    446
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then where does the taxation STOP? Don't you understand that a generous welfare state is OPTIONAL it is NOT mandatory! It is a LUXURY for countries that are in good economic times, not a mandatory expense that must be paid regardless of all other factors.

    Wealth is private peoperty and taxation is a violation of personal liberty and it also, is completely optional.

    Democrats need to stop acting like the welfare state is anything except discetionary spending, it isn't mandatory.

    Personal financial liberty IS mandatory.
     
  25. way2convey

    way2convey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Messages:
    16,627
    Likes Received:
    466
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Sorry about that. :alcoholic:
     

Share This Page