Socialism?
This is very interesting. A lot of people are freaking out about Obama's recent comment to "Joe the Plumber" about "spreading the wealth around". They're saying that he's a socialist, and he wants to do away with capitalism and make the country socialist. For whatever reason, a lot of people in this country are really seriously afraid of anything that could be deemed "socialism". I suppose it makes them think of communist Russia and China??? I don't know. But even some Democrats are freaking out about this. I thought that Obama just picked a very unfortunate way of wording what he said, and was worried that it would cost him swing votes, and maybe even some democratic votes.
But get this:
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
That was written by Adam Smith in 1776. You know, the guy who is called the "Father of Modern Economics". He wrote it in "The Wealth of Nations", often considered a treatise on capitalism. So, the guy who was all about free markets thought that it was okay for the rich to pay a little more proportionally of their income to help support the rest of society. Go figure. Anyone want to go ahead and call Adam Smith a Socialist? Or even better, a communist? Probably not.
I wish people would learn a little something about basic economics before they go spouting off about economic policies and tax plans and such.
But get this:
The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. . . . The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. . . . It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
That was written by Adam Smith in 1776. You know, the guy who is called the "Father of Modern Economics". He wrote it in "The Wealth of Nations", often considered a treatise on capitalism. So, the guy who was all about free markets thought that it was okay for the rich to pay a little more proportionally of their income to help support the rest of society. Go figure. Anyone want to go ahead and call Adam Smith a Socialist? Or even better, a communist? Probably not.
I wish people would learn a little something about basic economics before they go spouting off about economic policies and tax plans and such.