(10-25-2017 11:27 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(10-25-2017 08:57 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-25-2017 07:41 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  You can continue to be convinced that Lad and I and Obama think you didn't build your business, and didn't work very hard to do it. Speaking for myself, I can say that's not true at all. Most self-employed and entrepreneurs I've known over the years work their butts off. No one is disputing that.

You keep trotting out this straw man that the "you didn't build that" comment is some sort of personal attack on successful entrepreneurs. I don't think anyone disagrees with your assertion that it's not.

The problem driving the opposition is that "you didn't build that" transitions very easily to "you don't deserve that" and on to some notion that therefore you need to be paying some "fair share" to society that is a whole lot bigger than you currently pay. And nothing that you have posted suggests that it won't go there.

It's not a personal attack, it's an economic attack. Your success is not your success, it's society's success, and therefore your rewards should be society's rewards. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

I guess we are back to square one. The whole point of the Romney campaign's spin on that was to claim that it was a personal attack on entrepreneurs. It's not a straw man, it's what happened.

I think the leap from "maintaining infrastructure is important" or "R&D pays rewards later" to quoting Marx is the straw man.

Edit: Romney *literally* saying exactly what you said nobody is saying. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z83oQ3d-BgQ

I would agree with your strawman except for the fact that Obama quoted 'pay their fair share' like a myna-bird with ADHD issues.

And again, how do you square Obama's chastisement for 'you didnt build that' by making the evil greedy ******** (who already paid for that) the subject of his scorn? Pure ***** and giggles, I guess?

I guess it is okay to read reams and reams and libraries of context into Bannon being a racist, but contextual issues really dont matter flowing against that political wind.

So JAAO, why did Obama state 'you didnt build that' *to* the people that by every context imaginable already paid for those items? Since he isnt playing a class card to his base (of course no professional community organizer would *ever* do that, heavens to betsy), nor is trying to slut shame the evil greedy bastards into paying more, *why* make that statement at all regarding businessmen?

The readily apparent answer is that the collectivist / distributive types just want more from the people that built something. Pure and simple. And yes, the collectivist / distributionist message is *far* closer to a Marx/Engels school of thought than Milton Freidman, Hayek, or Mises. When the shoe fits.....