39. Redistribution of Wealth Must Always Be Adjusted.
Redistribution of the wealth of U.S. citizens has become a subject of debates between the press and the Republicans against President Obama. Today, the Syndicated Colonist, Thomas Sowell, speaks about 'The fallacy of redistribution' of President Obama. Sowell says that President Obama's ideas about redistribution is similar to the redistribution of food that became scarce in the Soviet Union under Stalin and caused many deaths.
I conclude that Colonists and Republicans do not consider God in their news articles and political debates. If they did, they would understand God's Intelligent Design and that the life of humans have no end.
After WWII, the GI Bill of Rights was issued by the U.S. government. The purpose of government was to increase science and technology in the USA. In the 1950s, I used this Bill of Rights at John Hopkins University to learn electrical engineering. With this education, I helped to send astronauts to the moon on President Kennedy's new space program. In 1971, I joined the U.S. Department of Justice to solve the rising crime rate.
By the early 1970s, the technological advances in autos, homes, health care, computers, etc. were unbelievable. However, in the 1970s, the wealth of the people became divided greatly: 90% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States; 9% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States; and 1% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States.
President Obama wants to redistribute the wealth of the 1% households so that more children of the 90% households can go to colleges and universities and become part of the 9% households that build small businesses. This redistribution is very reasonable.
I conclude that the thoughts of Thomas Sowell are not intelligent. The redistribution proposed by President Obama is not even similar to Stalin's redistribution.
I conclude that Colonists and Republicans do not consider God in their news articles and political debates. If they did, they would understand God's Intelligent Design and that the life of humans have no end.
After WWII, the GI Bill of Rights was issued by the U.S. government. The purpose of government was to increase science and technology in the USA. In the 1950s, I used this Bill of Rights at John Hopkins University to learn electrical engineering. With this education, I helped to send astronauts to the moon on President Kennedy's new space program. In 1971, I joined the U.S. Department of Justice to solve the rising crime rate.
By the early 1970s, the technological advances in autos, homes, health care, computers, etc. were unbelievable. However, in the 1970s, the wealth of the people became divided greatly: 90% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States; 9% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States; and 1% of the households owned one-third of the wealth of the United States.
President Obama wants to redistribute the wealth of the 1% households so that more children of the 90% households can go to colleges and universities and become part of the 9% households that build small businesses. This redistribution is very reasonable.
I conclude that the thoughts of Thomas Sowell are not intelligent. The redistribution proposed by President Obama is not even similar to Stalin's redistribution.
posted by George Shollenberger @ 11:42 AM
9 Comments:
At 11:01 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
The 1% already pays 70% of the taxes, how much more will satisfy you. People are not poor because other people are wealthy. More than one trillion has been redistributed through government programs and yet the poverty rate has risen, education standards have fallen, more people have gone on food stamps and unemployment and unemployment is over 8%. Our debt is at 16 trillion and growing. Even if you confiscated all of the wealth of the 1% that would only get you about 5.3 trillion dollars. Where are you going to get the other 11 trillion?
Your quixotic notions and wishful thinking will not accomplish anything and will only exacerbate an already untennable situation.
At 2:32 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David.
I see that you have not read the social contract theory of John Locke. If you knew Locke, you would know that 'hoarding' is eliminated. The Declaration of Independence also eliminated hoarding with the statement 'all Men are created equal.'
The USA is a Union, not a free-for-all. The development of the rich classes are made by U.S. criminals, who have not put in jail yet.
George
At 9:45 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
George, everytime I give you numbers you throw out Locke and a "more perfect Union" I am very familiar with Locke as I am an avid fan of history but there were several other thinkers and philosophers that our founders studied and admired that contributed to the founding documents. To make Locke the end all and be all of their thinking is being incredibly short sighted.
At 9:45 AM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
George, everytime I give you numbers you throw out Locke and a "more perfect Union" I am very familiar with Locke as I am an avid fan of history but there were several other thinkers and philosophers that our founders studied and admired that contributed to the founding documents. To make Locke the end all and be all of their thinking is being incredibly short sighted.
At 1:05 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David,
You can't know Locke's social contract theory and you can;t know the correct meaning of 'a more perfect Union' when you acept capitalism.
THE USA IS A NATION OF PEOPLE WHO WORK TOGETHER. THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT ABSOLUTELY FREE. FREE ENTERPRISEE IS A THOUGHT OF ALL RICH PEOPLE WHO NEED SLAVES.
George
At 3:46 PM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
Little thing called the thirteenth amendment so I don't know where your slavery reference has any relevance.
The founders meant a more perfect union as individuals working for their own advancement and coming together for common cause as states, not having an overreaching federal government dictating their actions, thus free enterprise was their economy of choice. Locke was wedded to this theory as he contributed to the Carolina charter. I believe he would shudder at your interpretation of his thoughts. Read the state constitutions of the time, they were focused on individual attainment and societal success and these were borrowed from to create the Constitution.
At 3:17 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David,
In science, union means 'a whole that has a number of parts.' Thus, a nation is a whole that has a number of humans. Your interpretation of our scientific founders is wrong.
In the Constitution, the founders said that government 'forms a more perfect Union,' based on 'laws of nature and Nature's God.' The people cannot make any laws. Representatives do it through God.
The U.S. governmnet has three powers. The States and the people have no powers. It seems that you are building 'state rights' for West Virginia. The States were spoken of as 'territories.
I conclude that your God is not 'in' the USA functionally.
George
At 4:19 PM,
David S. Wilkinson said…
Check out that little thing called the 10th amendment George.
At 11:00 AM,
George Shollenberger said…
Response to David,
Even though rights can be given to the States by the people, the people must still give the states rights that are coming only from God, because people are not absolutely free. Only God is absolutely free and has no cause.
George
Post a Comment
<< Home