why do people think obama is a socialist

\"\"

Look at his actions! Look at some of the legislation our Dear Leader has tried to (and / or has) passed over the course of his presidency. The Affordable Care Act (AKA Obamacare) is a system of national healthcare in which those who could not afford healthcare otherwise are being given benefits they cannot afford, and those who do not need these benefits (or who need other coverage options) are forced to take them anyway, and pay extra for all others. This is the distribution of wealth – socialism. It is unfair to the producing members of society – the job makers and those who work hard in their professions. It takes money away from them to pay for those who do not work hard and cannot afford healthcare for themselves. What, then, is the incentive for anybody to produce if it will just be taken away? Also, just look at two big issues Obama is involved in: the previously mentioned social healthcare, and gun control. I do not believe it is a coincidence that these are the first two things Adolf Hitler imposed upon his country when he took office. He would sacrifice our second amendment rights based upon the actions of a few people. His logic is \’If guns are outlawed, outlaws will not have guns\’. When in reality the reason they are called outlaws is because they are outside the law. If guns are outlawed, nobody will have guns but outlaws. Finally, take a look at his stance on income tax. He supports the graduated income tax system. In this system, the percentage of your income you pay in taxes increases as you make more money. This system only serves to drain the rich of their money, and lighten taxes on those with lower incomes. In fact, the bottom 50% of the US population pays no income taxes at all in this system. This is once again the distribution of wealth – socialism.

\"\"

The rich are forced to find ways to hide their money, because they know that the government will just take it all away. Why work hard to earn the money when it will just be taken from you? Why work at all then the government will take care of you? These are the questions that come into people\’s minds when socialism is instituted. A flat percentage tax would be more effective. The rich would still pay higher taxes, but the percentage of the income would remain constant. This way, all citizens of the United States would be subject to help support their country. He just dosnt admit it because he would lose all support that he has. He thinks exactly like a cummunist. Heres an example, he made up the parent 1 and parent 2 instead of mom and dad. Also the thing that proves that he is the most is that he supports the idea that the children belong to the cumunity instead of the family
So while Obama has not been able to push every one of his agenda items through, his intentions have been quite clear. That\’s not to say his intentions are evil or wrong. It\’s not a bad thing to want socialized medicine or to want to raise the poverty floor in this country. Those are lofty worthwhile goals. It\’s the methods that become the problem. Nothing is free and some are all too willing to let the government take care of them than to make the attempt to pull themselves out of poverty, which is quite possible and encouraged in Capitalism. I think the issue is there are people in this country that, rightfully, believe they are in control of their destiny, not the government. The other side, if agreed to by everyone, is totally legitimate as well. The problem is that the two ideals do not mix well. Obama is of one side but he knows that he cannot simply wave his hand and make the US a Socialist country.

\"\"

He pushes policy that lead in that general direction. There is no doubt about that. If he isn\’t, his teleprompter must be. Socialism is, at the most basic, public ownership of industry, banking, medical facilities and all other public services. It takes away the incentive for private individuals to succeed because it takes away the reward for doing so. By overly taxing those people who take the risk to achieve, it takes away the reward for that risk. Yes, President Obama\’s political policies create a socialist nation. Socialism is, at the most basic, public ownership of industry, banking, medical facilities and all other public services. It takes away the incentive for private individuals to succeed because it takes away the reward for doing so. By overly taxing those people who take the risk to achieve, it takes away the reward for that risk. Yes, President Obama\’s political policies create a socialist nation. Socialism is, at the most basic, public ownership of industry, banking, medical facilities and all other public services. It takes away the incentive for private individuals to succeed because it takes away the reward for doing so. By overly taxing those people who take the risk to achieve, it takes away the reward for that risk. This from James Carville\’s Democracy Corps firm is bad, bad news for Obama, incumbent Democrats, and the White House\’s economic message. If you\’re a Republican, be happy for the midterms. First, when asked if they thought the president was a socialist, 55 percent of likely voters said yes. Only 39 percent said no. Oh god. For the record, if Obama\’s trying to be a socialist, he\’s doing a terrible job! He\’s cut taxes for small businesses and increased government spending mostly to replace lost income and state revenue.

Financial reform is less like a straitjacket for banks and more like a tight sweater whose dimensions and fit will be determined by future studies. But the definition of socialist in politics is about as liquid and malleable the term moderate. It means whatever the user wants it to mean at the moment of its usage. The more concerning part of the survey is below, where respondents were asked which jobs strategy they preferred: \”The best way to improve our economy and create jobs is to invest more to put people to work, develop new industries, and help businesses grow in expanding, new areas. \” \”The best way to improve our economy and create jobs is to cut government spending and cut taxes so businesses can prosper and the private sector can start creating jobs. \” There are a couple points to make here. First, since this is Carville\’s poll, I\’m a little surprised that he put tax cuts in the second sentence but not the first, since tax cuts did account for more than a third of the spent stimulus, and payroll taxes are official nil for all 2010 hires. If you want to make Democratic policies sell, then you should try to sell them. It\’s the tax cuts, stupid! Second, as a matter of logic, it\’s easy to explain to public\’s distaste for more government spending. Follow this narrative: Obama assumed office, the stimulus passed, and unemployment rose above 10 percent. It\’s not hard to interpret proximity as causation, and I think most Americans are doing just that. Third, this is just great news for Republicans. The first sentence included classic Democratic terms like invest and new and new (again! ). The second sentence is unvarnished, boilerplate conservative messaging and half the country is eating it up, even after hearing the alternative.

Show More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

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

Back to top button
Close