Is Obama’s Class Warfare Strategy Working with Americans?

In a video that has gone viral, Elizabeth Warren attempts to refute Republican charges that President Obama and the Democrats are engaged in a high-risk game of class warfare:

“There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there, good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for.”

Ignorant people fall for this type of rhetoric. Just as little thinking about Warren’s arguments will show how ridiculous they are.

No one is stopping the non-rich from using the roads. In fact, they use them to buy food and clothing, go to the movies, and shop for their favorite electronic toys brought to them by the rich sons of bitches they so despise. There are lots of not-so-rich people who own cell phones and televisions. Can you imagine? Where did these things come from? That’s right; some rich company produced them and drove them on the roads they also pay for within a few miles of our homes.

You don’t even need a car to buy what we want or need. You can I can get almost anything delivered right to our front door by some other rich company that built warehouses, bought delivery trucks, hired workers, paid them a salary, trained them, etc.

Starting a business is difficult, but it can be done. If you or I start a business, we can use the same roads the rich use. No one is barred from using the roads.

The rich aren’t the only ones who went to school. Maybe the rich studied harder. Maybe a lot of people who are poor dropped out of high school. There are economic ramifications as the following points out:

Young adults with low education and skill levels are more likely to live in poverty and to receive government assistance. Further, high school dropouts are more likely to become involved in crime. Poor health, including poor mental health, is also linked with dropout status. Such negative outcomes, along with diminished labor force participation exact a high economic toll on society.  In a recent study in California, researchers found that each annual wave of high school dropouts cost the state over $40 billion over the course of their lives.

Why does a non-rich person have the right to the profits that a rich person makes if he’s not willing to participate in the risks the rich person takes? Is Ms. Warren willing to pay back a company if it fails in the same way that she wants that company to pay in taxes if it succeeds?

There’s a lot that goes into making money. The non-rich don’t have to worry about payroll, payroll taxes, insurance, competition, rent, inventory costs, government regulations, hiring regulations, legal costs, and dozens of other unseen expenses. President Obama has never run a business. He’s never had to meet payroll or wrangle with the EEOC over hiring irregularities. He and his fellow Democrats believe that by passing a law, economic equity can be achieved.

The poor aren’t poor because someone else is rich. Some poor people may be lazy, unskilled, unwilling to take risks, unable to run a company, or not interested in putting the time and effort needed to run a business. If the rich are doing something illegal to keep people poor, then that’s a different issue, but Ms. Warren and else wealth-redistibutionists aren’t playing that game because they know they can’t win it. No one is forcing people to buy iPhones, iPads, high priced celebrity clothing, expensive cars, big houses, and TVs.

Instead of envying the rich like Elizabeth Warren does, she should promote the idea of participating in the free enterprise system. There are thousands of companies to invest in. Of course, the stock market is a dangerous place at the moment. That’s because government has gotten involved. The mortgage crisis was the result of the government telling mortgage companies that they had to lend to people who had less than desirable credit. When lenders balked, the government promised to back the risky loans through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Calling for “tax equity,” like Warren does, only takes the incentive away from people involved in business. Tax equity doesn’t help the little guy. If a millionaire gets taxed at a higher right than he is being taxed now, what benefit does it bring to the person who is not taxed at all? Is there any wealth transfer? Has anyone actually been made wealthy by having the rich taxed, other than politicians and Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson?

The non-rich know that their benefit will be minimal. They know that their household income is not going to increase if the rich are taxed more. The results of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society anti-poverty legislation is prime evidence that programs designed to help the poor only help to keep them poor.

If the rich were taxed less, they would spend and invest more. Their capital would be at less risk.  It’s their spending and investing that leads to job growth. Job growth leads to hiring. Hiring leads to a direct increase in household income.

But there’s a problem. Prosperity that comes by way of the market place and not the halls of Congress does not benefit politicians. That’s why President of Obama and the Democrats want more tax revenue. With it, they can buy votes and stay in power. It’s not about helping the poor; it’s about keep more voters dependent on government.

Previous post

'All the News WE Say Is Fit To Print’

Next post

Down with the Tea Party, Up with the Wall Street Protestors?