I find this whole “Obama is going to take your money and give it to undeserving people” theme kind of obtuse. Everybody agrees that having a wealth spread to a large number of people is a better economic situation than having wealth concentrated in a small number of people.
The hard core, libertarian capitalists argue that their position is best because it is an effective mechanism to … spread the wealth.
The supply-side Reagonomics people argue that the trickle-down approach will … spread the wealth.
The Marxists think direct confiscation and distribution is the best way to spread the wealth.
Obama thinks that policies that pay particular attention to the needs of the poorest 95% of the country is the best way to accomplish this same goal. So enough with articles like this, which accuse Obama of having some secret radical agenda. The far right, the far left, and Obama all more or less agree that they want a country where most people are able to meet their needs and live comfortably enough that they don’t need to worry about an economic downturn. The main difference is that Obama has a set of plans with a fighting chance of accomplishing this goal.
