Obama audio: government redistribution of wealth

[paul1149]

Here's a 2001 radio interview of Obama as he holds forth on how the government can best redistribute wealth.

He laments that the civil rights movement "didn't break free of the constraints of the Founding Fathers"

Someone needs to transcribe this audio. h/t FR.

Click to view

Comments

[indalay]

You've given people other people's money once

And then the need will be justified to give it to them twice, and 3x, etc etc. And then there will be new people with need, joining up with the previous first batch of "have-nots". And more and more and more, as many of those who work hard see the futility and just join in with the others. And some will have to, because jobs will be lost.

There won't be enough jobs because the climate for business will be cold and harsh.

It seems to me that a point is reached where the government won't be able to find enough people or businesses left to tax to support itself and all the people who now expect to be supported by the government.

Disaster.

But certainly someone in charge will see this trend and stop it before we go into the crapper?

[indalay]

Yeah.

[eastertheatre]

Mine just write me back with form letters completely irrelevant to what I actually said.

[eastertheatre]

Ha! Sounds enlightening :) My representatives are Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, so when I wrote asking them to stop wasting tax money on pandering, populist hearings about how gas companies are "gouging" customers, I get a letter saying they understand my concern about high gas prices and they are doing everything they can to get a windfall tax passed...sigh...

[wolfp10]

A couple of years ago I wrote to Rep. John Larson about the Northern Ireland Peace Process; the IRA had put down some arms earlier in the week. I got back a personal reply that was something to the effect of "I follow the situation closely, I take it seriously, thank you for caring about it."

[eastertheatre]

That's nice -- I would be happy to get a letter like that.

[eastertheatre]

It's really quite frustrating -- as Americans we are lambasted for being politically apathetic and not participating in our democracy, yet when we actually do try to do so, it comes to nothing. Somehow I don't think just voting on whatever two choices are stuck in front of me is a triumph of representative democracy.

[paul1149]

Government doesn't do charity well. It tends to grow bloated, ineffective bureaucracies which distribute largess with a lack of accountability that makes the problem worse. As you say, we have The Great Society as dramatic proof. The problem is that the Dems want better services for the poor, but they will not reign in special interests like the teachers' unions. And those special interests have resisted accountability with a vengeance.

So on the ground it ends up throwing money at the problem, and there is no change, except that the hard working folks are penalized.

I'm actually for charitable works and providing opportunity, but government's role here should be very limited. The private sector does a much better job of dispensing mercy with discernment the demand for accountability. This is a role for individuals, churches, and civic organizations, not for the taxman at the barrel of a gun.

[politikitty]

Or he could be saying that it's difficult to create legitimacy at all for wealth distribution based on civil right violations. He simply used the courts as the example because the previous part of the interview was about the Warren Court.

Also, if you redistribute wealth, you haven't cost anyone jobs. When they spend money, they'll do it at stores, which hire people to both sell things and produce the goods they sell. Progressive taxation has not ended the economy as we know it.