Posted on 07/19/2012 5:42:18 PM PDT by Sir Napsalot
President Obama’s instantly infamous “You didn’t build that” speech is a major turning point of the 2012 election not because it was a gaffe but because it was an accurate and concise summary of core progressive fiscal dogma. It was also a political blunder of epic proportions because in his speech Obama unintentionally proved the conservatives’ case for limited government.
This essay will show you how.
When Obama implied at the Roanoke, Virginia rally that some businessmen refuse to pay for public works from which they benefit, he presented a thesis which, like a three-legged stool, relies on three assumptions that must all be true for the argument to remain standing:
1. That the public programs he mentioned in his speech constitute a significant portion of the federal budget; 2. That business owners don’t already pay far more than their fair share of these expenses; and 3. That these specific public benefits are a federal issue, rather than a local issue.
If any of these legs fails, then the whole argument collapses.
For good measure, we won’t just kick out one, we’ll kick out all three.
“Small Government” Is Not the Same as “No Government”
(snip) The Numbers Here is the federal government’s budgetary breakdown for a recent fiscal year: …….
Department of Defense 18.74%
Department of Transportation 2.05%
Department of Education 1.32%
Department of Homeland Security 1.21%
Department of Justice 0.67%
National Science Foundation 0.20%
TOTAL: 23.4%
So what Obama and Warren are really stating is this: Only one-fourth of your federal tax dollars go to projects and programs that benefit the general public and entrepreneurs; the other three-fourths are essentially a complete waste, or are at best optional. Which of course is exactly what fiscal conservatives have been arguing all along.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
leg #2 The Wealthy Already Pay Far More Than Their “Fair Share”
and
leg #3 Education, Public Safety and Roads Are Covered by Local Taxes, Not Federal Taxes
The government cannot use tax money taken from the private sector to build roads and bridges and then say to the private sector “you owe me” for those roads and bridges.
You don’t need all kinds of fancy essays to take down 0bama’s statement...
Simply ask whoever is spouting off...what would happen if businesses went on strike for a week, a month, or even a year?
No payroll, no tax dollars, no profits...nothing.
Who maintains the infrastructure, who supports the communities and when it comes time to restart the economic engine...it won’t be government that fixes those roads or restores your electricity.
Who is John Galt?
bkmk
Obama seems to think successful people should be punished and losers should be rewarded.
I’m glad to see Romney immediately jumped on this and began pounding our Dear Leader. It is getting plenty of traction, even though Obama’s complicit MSM is doing what they can to stay away from it.
Obama really stepped in it with this one. Make him pay.
There's no "seems to" about it whatsoever.
"From each according to his abilities; to each according to his needs." is Obama's core, if not his only, philosophy.
You are right of course but Obama thinks of himself as king and we are his serfs. Which his statement makes perfect sense under a feudalistic system
He’s got a bad habit of superimposing his own character flaws on the rest of population.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.