It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Obama: Policies promote opportunity, not Socialism

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:20 PM

Obama: Policies promote opportunity, not Socialism

Obama said his plans to raise taxes on the wealthy to provide tax relief for the middle class and expanded health care coverage for millions of Americans would move the economy forward again.

"John McCain calls this socialism, apparently. I call it opportunity, and there's nothing more American than that," he said.
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related Discussion Threads:
Socialism proof - Obama's 'Spread the wealth around' comment (video)

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:20 PM

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Wednesday disputed Republican charges that he was promoting socialism, telling a crowd in Raleigh that his economic plan would promote opportunity for most Americans.


"By the end of the week, he'll be accusing me of being a secret communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten," Obama said, prompting a roar of laughter from the thousands of people standing on Halifax Mall in the state government complex downtown.


In a Fayetteville rally Tuesday, McCain said Obama "wants to punish success," and he said his own tax policies would create more wealth for everyone instead of redistributing it from the wealthy to the poor.

we hear all this information about Obama promoting Socialism, but where's the proof?? i mean, i wouldn't doubt it at all that he is, but what evidence makes Barack Obama a Socialist - how would one convince a "sheep" that Obama stands for Socialism?

any takers?
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:46 PM
I don't believe there is any such proof, because Obama is not in fact a Socialist.

All the fuss is about his tax structure. It is a different tax structure than the trickle-down proponents prefer, but it is still just a tax structure, and ALL tax structures "spread the wealth around"... just to one recipient or another.

Obama's tax structure may or may not improve the situation, that remains to be seen.

He is, however, no more a Socialist than any politician that supports any tax structure.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:54 PM
reply to post by adrenochrome

He is the most left leaning senator currently, he pals around with communist/terrorists, he believes in taking from the rich and giving it to the poor, he wants the government to take care of you from birth til death.

All of this government intrusion into our personal lives equals socialist/communist.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:56 PM
Opportunity for businesses and businesses only.

Businesses have more rights than living humans.

Absurd, yes.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:56 PM
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic

Wrong, the poor pay no taxes at all, so in effect he is stealing from the people who are succesful and giving it away to the people that cannot keep a penny.

[edit on 29-10-2008 by stinkhorn]

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:12 PM
why does this remind me of the recent high-fructose corn syrup industry's propaganda, that says its product is not harmful to your health, even though we all know it is?...

why does mainstream news have to blatantly go all out and tell you specifically he's not a Socialist? is that really necessary? maybe if they didn't tell us, we'd still have grounds to say he is? are they just clearing things up, or are they simply lying through their teeth?

last i checked, we're a Capitalist nation. Capitalism is the first step to Communism, and Socialism is the second...

Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution which represents the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:20 PM
reply to post by stinkhorn

You know you have to pay income tax on unemployment checks?

I couldnt believe it either but you do.

I think it's mostly funny and a little sadistic to punish success and 'promote opportunity' all in one fell swoop. Obama loves you until you gross 250K (or is it 150K now?) but as soon as you cross some arbitrary line of success you become the devil incarnate and deserve to have it all stripped away.

I hate taxation. Few things are as evil.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:30 PM
They had the candidate for a real socialist party on the Colbert Report last night.

It just goes to show how dumb people are when they believe this crap being fed to them that Obama is a socialist.


posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:36 PM
Obama's plan is going to take away the American dream and give it to others who made bad decisions in their life. I'd love to see everyone own a home, have health insurance and be proud of themselves, but they have to earn it. Obama's plan promotes opportunity for those who don't try hard enough and plan well. I was also wondering if his plan is for everybody to be poor, middle class or wealthy
If it's fair then what will we all be? Government is the problem and no one will fix America using the government.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:47 PM
reply to post by Solarskye

Really, so I guess in that case, anyone who doesn't subscribe to supply-side economics is a socialist?

Can you back that up by defining Obama's "policies" and comparing it socialism?

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:25 PM
reply to post by stinkhorn

So in other words, you disagree on the details regarding on whom taxes are levied, and who gets the revenue from those taxes.

Fine, great, I have no problem with your disagreement.

But that does not change the basic structure of the fact it is a tax. For example we could say everybody that breathes in the US pays one dollar a day tax, and it all goes to the military.

That would be exactly the same... one group is being taxed, and another group gets the revenue.

Disagree with Obama's tax plan if you want, that is part of the process of keeping America great (or returning America to greatness).

But to label a tax structure as Socialist because you disagree with who is taxed and who gets the money is not accurate.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:26 PM
reply to post by Sublime620

ouch man... was the "idiots" remark really necessary? or are you just trying to make yourself feel better about what you want to believe?

...chew on this:

In 1995, the British Labour Party revised its political aims: The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that, by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create, for each of us, the means to realise our true potential, and, for all of us, a community in which power, wealth, and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few; famously, Cabinet minister Herbert Morrison said, Socialism is what the Labour Government does.

...where have i heard something like this before?...
sounds a little too familiar...


What a Labor Government Would Be Like (2 pages)

[edit on 29-10-2008 by adrenochrome]

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:32 PM
this thread is hilarious, and so is this issue on socialism

Im tend to label myself a socialist

obama is not, his redistribution of wealth means going to pay for things such as police, fire, roads, schools etc

he wont give the poor people money, its not like a check is going to be mailed to a poor person saying here you go, all for you

he is planning tax relief for under 250,000 so we dont have to pay so much for things like police, fire, roads etc

those making over 250,000 will only have a 3% tax increase

at 250,000 a year, 3% tax isnt much more than what they are paying now

that is not socialism at all

to me socialism means people before profit

if obama was a socialist he'd be tearing town the whole capitalist empire that is america, he is not, he is part of that machine and capaitalist are supporting him

why would they do that if he is just gonna give poor people money for nothing

alot of you here who are uneducated on such subjects need to read up and really study instead of just thinking you know what it means or letting news outlets think for you


thanks for the laughs though

i love election years

[edit on 29-10-2008 by MurderCityDevil]

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:45 PM
The problem is why does he have the right to set the line in the sand on who should be taxed and who shouldn't. How about anyone making more than 20,000 a year should pay more taxes...and the anyone below that gets a tax cut. Does anyone see a problem with this? Who is he to say who should pay more?

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:49 PM
reply to post by David9176

That is an entirely different question (a good one, I think), and does not relate to the charge of Socialism for a proposed tax structure.

Obama's tax structure may be the best thing since sliced bread, or it may be a disaster.

It just isn't, as has been claimed, Socialism.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:55 PM
reply to post by Open_Minded Skeptic

I understand your point and you certainly entitled to your opinion...but when he is quoted saying "Spread the Wealth Around" and "redistribution of Wealth". What does he expect? Why wouldn't someone think this? He brought this upon himself. There are people out there who are worried...secretly worried...and they won't talk about it. Obama lost many votes on these comments...and he can't take it won't matter what he says now.

No one should be paying higher taxes.....everyone should be paying lower taxes...especially when our economy if struggling to stay afloat.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:56 PM
reply to post by adrenochrome

You can't pick one similar thing out and then announce that they are the same. That's a whole slew of argumentative fallacies. I'm sure it is at least circular logic, straw man, and non sequitur. I'm sure it fits into more.

Opportunity for all is basically in our Constitution. Were our founding fathers socialists?

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:00 PM
reply to post by David9176

Well, he certainly did himself no good with his choice of words, on that we agree completely...

I've heard his comments in context, in the interview with the infamous Joe, and it is clear to me that he was not speaking in a Socialistic meaning.

I believe a major reason people think he means Socialism is because McCain and Palin jumped on his phraseology and started shrieking "Socialism" at the top of their lungs... it is a fear-term in the US, and as with most fear-terms, its actual accuracy is not relevant, sadly.

Note that I am not taking a particular stand on Obama's tax plan... although I will benefit from it. I'm just saying it is not Socialism.

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:02 PM
reply to post by David9176

ok, so i get the whole no higher taxes for anyone

i think in the long run, the middle class tax break will do more good than bad

mccain, says he wont raise taxes so theyll stay the same, kinda sucks

so i wont be saving anymore than i am now, still, in this crisis

i dont think he will ever give a tax break either, if anything something will come along to have to increase them somewhat

giving big business tax breaks doesnt do anything for the majority of americans at all

if there is supply and demand for a company, hiring new work is something they would do anyway

so for him to say big business tax breaks will create new jobs.

noone is really buying or spending right now, so the demand for products and services arent high enough for them to hire anyway

so how does that work

i do agree that obama saying "redistribute the wealth" was misunderstood

myself, being a socialist didnt think that was a socialist thing to say

i knew he meant to help the country, like i said before with police, fire, roads, etc, etc

people just dont research enough on their own and learn to know what is what and how

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in