'You Didn't Build That'

[Return of the Mack]

To suggest that government is responsible for the success of people who take risks and generate jobs, is one of the dumbest things a POTUS has ever said.

[Return of the Mack]

Strawman, eh?  Cue the transcript:

" But you know what, I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them.  So I’m going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way.  We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts.  We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more.  (Applause.)  And, by the way, we’ve tried that before -- a guy named Bill Clinton did it.  We created 23 million new jobs, turned a deficit into a surplus, and rich people did just fine.  We created a lot of millionaires.

     There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me -- because they want to give something back.  They know they didn’t -- look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own.  You didn’t get there on your own.  I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart.  There are a lot of smart people out there.  It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.  Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.  (Applause.)

     If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.  There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.  Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive.  Somebody invested in roads and bridges.  If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.  The Internet didn’t get invented on its own.  Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

----

He clearly attempted to justify raising taxes on business owners because, in his own words, business owners didn't build their businesses, someone else made that happen, and that someone is the government.

What a complete and utter joke this president is.

[Return of the Mack]

So Obama is telling a business owner, let's say a paint store owner for argument sake, that the roads weren't built by his business?!  Then where did the money come from to build the road if not from tax revenue generated through sales and employees of the business?

Business is the goose laying the golden eggs, not government.

And something else to ponder...if government is the engine for job creation, then why did government give the businesses to the ones who currently have them?!  Obama just stated business owners are not smarter and do not work harder (read the full text of his quote that I posted earlier)...so if government is responsible for success of the business owner, what exactly is determining winners and losers if not the government?  And if government is paving our way, then why is Obama lecturing business owners instead of lecturing the government?!

The speech is insane on so many levels and shows he has no concept of the utilization of capital within capitalism.

[Return of the Mack]

I would just like to thank the government for choosing to give me, of all people, the stuff that I have.

[Return of the Mack]

So Obama is telling a business owner, let's say a paint store owner for argument sake, that the roads weren't built by his business?!  Then where did the money come from to build the road if not from tax revenue generated through sales and employees of the business?

If you're going to use logic like that, you may as well say God built everything.

Look, in Texas, we believe in spending on infrastructure, which is why Texas’ infrastructure is ranked #Uno out of all the 57 states:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/47818860/Texas_Is_America_s_Top_State_for_Business_2012

But, we understand we built our infrastructure to serve all individuals, not just the business owners.  So it makes no sense to lecture just the business owners by accusing them of being 1) no smarter and no harder working than the less successful, and 2) getting a free ride on the  nation’s  infrastructure...and so therefore they should give up more of their capital, which they are putting to use effectively, in order to transfer that capital to the less effective.

In a capitalistic society, when capital is redirected from effective use to ineffective use, jobs are destroyed, not created.  Which is why “redistributing the wealth” never creates jobs, what creates jobs is finding effective utilization for the available capital.

[Return of the Mack]

I don't think anybody disputes that. What we're disputing is what constitutes effective or preferable utilization.

Well, since Obama only chose to lecture the rich, is he not saying, in effect, "You business owners, in particular, you are not making effective use of your capital; therefore, the government is going to take it from you and put it to more effective use."

It is insane to single out and lecture business people and basically accuse them of not making effective use of their capital when they are the ones who accepted the risks to go into business and actually become effective enough to hire people to help them run his/her business.  For not only were they effective enough to generate income for others, not just themselves, but they were effective enough to generate tax revenue for the government.

[Return of the Mack]

That's all a matter of ideological point of view, jmfcst.

No, it's a matter of understanding how capital flows function, Heinrich.

[Return of the Mack]

There's no fundamental reason why capitalist ownership on the particular hierarchical model that is for the most part currently followed would be necessary for capital flows to work, except for just enjoying the hierarchical model on its own merits.

Ever been to school?  Don't all the students start each semester with a clean slate?  Yet some excel while others struggle.  Why is that?  Isn't part of the reason is that some are smarter and/or work harder than others and therefore are more effective at school?

So it is in life - if you redistributed all the wealth evenly and then left the individuals to their own merits, after a relative short period of time, you'd end up with roughly the same distribution as you currently see.  The only way to keep the wealth evenly distributed is to hold back the more effective.

Every semester you were in school taught you that lesson.  Apply it.