Obama´s "Spread the Wealth" Message

When Joe the Plumber brought up the issue of taxation on the small businessperson he caught Obama in a dilemma that revealed his true ideas of change. Obama´s idea of change is quite fundamental. In a country where risk has always been a part of life Obama wants to eliminate risk except in the arena of politics. If you are willing to take a risk to start a business as Joe the Plumber hypothesized this used to imply you would be rewarded for taking that risk by the potential for profit. Under the Obama scenario if you reach the level of income that small business requires to operate, you will face a heavier tax burden than if you simply play it safe as an employee. This is pandering to the employee vote and discouraging the ambitious from taking on risk and incidentally providing more jobs. The way Obama phrased it revealed it was all about wealth redistribution.

Why should a person that faces a smaller risk be rewarded and a person who is willing to put his reputation and wealth on the line face a penalty? In reason there is no way that this can be explained. It is the egalitarian ideology in full bloom. The only exception of course is the political elite that operate on a higher need basis including luxuries that the taxation pays for. When the risk of beginning and building and operating a business is subservient to the employee´s simply showing up for work the incentive to run a business disappears. With the incentive gone the start up and continuation of businesses diminishes, jobs disappear, even tax revenues shrink and all in the name of "spreading the wealth".

A follow up question that Joe the Plumber could have asked that would have made the issue crystal clear would have been, " Do you mean my wealth?". For you see without Joe taking the risk, borrowing the money to get started and working long hours there would be no wealth to spread around. What gives a politician the audacity to think he has the right to take one person´s earning and give them to others? This idea died with the Soviet Union which proved as concretely as is possible that forcing others to give up their ambitions and giving equal amounts of wealth to everyone ( except the political elite) wouldn´t work, was morally wrong and destroys countries. Yet this idea is being pushed under the cover of "change". It is a promise that was never fully articulated until Obama slipped up with his "explanation " of how his tax plan would work.

We have known for years that socialism was gradually being slipped into our way of life with entitlements, socialized medicine advocacy, nationalization of the passenger rail service, the ever expanding Post Office monopoly, an ever expanding deficit and national debt, more and more regulation, and cries in any emergency that called for government help. With this trend it was natural for some politician to think the time was ripe for a full blown effort to bring socialism into the light. Socialism openly advocated has a stigma in the United States because there are enough people aware of what it is and how it operates. There are still veterans who fought against it. There are some talking heads who denounce it. There are immigrants who have lived under it and hated it. Of course there are the intellectuals who live in a fantasy world and think it can work even though it has failed repeatedly in the real world. So it was not time to come out for socialism under its name but accepting the fundamental aspect of it and putting it under the banner of "change" was an acceptable alternative. If Joe the Plumber had not arrived on the scene and asked a pertinent question the facade might have continued without discovery until the die had been cast. Bill Clinton spilled the beans when he talked about the need for targeted tax cuts stating that people might not spend their money as they should. He was ready for government to describe who got what and how they should spend it which is a way of spreading the wealth around. Redistribution of wealth has always been a central component of the Democratic Party and the proponent that was most adept at presenting this injustice to the voters captured the Democratic nomination even though he is a relatively new comer.

Now that his agenda is openly exposed the American voter can judge whether he or she is willing to flush the American dream or reject the McGovern revival that was soundly rejected and should be rejected again. Are there enough Americans who understand what self reliance and the American Dream requires or are they outnumbered by the drones who listen to spellbinding nonsense and want a nanny government that will inflate our currency into oblivion and lower our standard of living so that they can point the finger of blame, live in a world of complaints and be content that their neighbor has no more than they do?

The real America will emerge from this election and even though John McCain is no champion of capitalism he is not the implicit socialist Barrack Obama. The country has been drifting towards socialism for decades as government continues to encroach and grow. There are opportunities to check this advance but since the message is usually hidden under platitudes and promises the trend is often obfuscated. Thanks to Joe the Plumber a voice has emerged that exposed the direction the candidate Obama is hell bent on pursuing. This opening in the veneer of Obama should be recognized as a warning that needs to be heeded. If it is rationalized or ignored the only winners will be the Obamaites that long for a country that was never patterned after the failures of the socialist dream. These countries abound and struggle with their inflation and deterioration wanting the U.S. to bail them out. As our production dries up and withers under the yoke of a socialist regime the prospects for peace and prosperity also dries up. There was not much of a choice until the revelation of Joe the Plumber. He provided us with the proverbial," lead pipe cinch".