Jay Carney Wants to Spread Sacrifice and Prosperity or Spread Wealth

White House Jay Carney Wants to “Spread The Sacrifice” Meaning The Wealth

Published on July 6, 2011

Yesterday White House Press Secretary Jay Carney had something interesting to say about the administration’s view on what they think Americans want the government to do to fix the economy. He said:

They just want us to get something done that’s sensible, that spreads the sacrifice and spreads the prosperity that hopefully a significant deal will help produce.

Let me translate. The administration believes Americans want the government to raise taxes and essentially steal more to pay for wasteful government programs. Sound familiar? It is the same failed planned and philosophy that has been guiding this country toward ruin.

Now you may remember during the 2008 campaign then Senator Obama previewed for voters what he had planned for our economy by telling Joe the Plumber he wanted to “spread the wealth” around. It wreaked of the Marxist creed, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” and having lived through Obamanonics it was a far more accurate explanation of his policy than he gave during speeches and debates.

Now that our economy has sunk further into the brink and the President is once again trying to sound like a centrist for the 2012 election, one would expect the Obama administration would be tight-lipped about any plans to “spread the wealth” or the new coded word “sacrifice” when talking on camera. Sadly they actually seem to believe in this magic.

Here is a plan, how about the American people sacrifice the wasteful government pork and stop taking away the money of those who produce? Get government out of the market and it will spread prosperity just fine. Big government got us here, it won’t get us out.

josh c

yah so raising taxes in this economy and state of the country is actually a really good idea. we kind of need that since our debt is spiraling out of control thanks to you “roaring republicans”. thank you for waging wars while at the same time giving rich people a tax cut. that makes a lot of sense. and thank you for letting trillions of dollars be stolen by rich banks and corporations b/c you deregulated the financial sector and refuse to enforce laws. and then thank you for trying to slash and burn our spending while absolutely refusing to raise taxes which would fix a lot of the problems. basically, shut up and get out of the way b/c you know nothing.
http://roaringrepublican.com/ Nathan Harvey

It would be very interesting to see what economic metric you are considering when saying the economy “has sunk further into the brink”.

It is so strange to see Republicans constantly argue that raising taxes on the rich would hurt the economy. Anyone who can do even simple math should realise that the stimulus of someone who uses maybe 5% of their tax savings to hire new people is much less stimulus than the government using 80% of a new tax to offer targeted hiring grants (and say 20% to reduce deficit). Even if wealthy people used on average 50% of their savings to grow their companies’ employees, it couldn’t compare to the government taxing that and targeting 100%, because the government can choose how to target funds. Tax breaks are not controlled spending.

And individuals mostly do not use tax savings to build their companies, because it is horrible accounting practice. Companies need to be able to support their workforce on company profits. Instead, tax savings in upper brackets go to savings (no stimulus), luxury goods (which is not stimulative spending because it is scarce and inconstant), or to things like further gentrification (purchasing properties to rent to lower classes – ie. a block to class mobility).

I really don’t understand how this lie that government taxation is anti-stimulus continues to be propagated, when simple econometrics would show otherwise.

Dinguscajero

Businesses hire people because they NEED them, not because they have ‘targeted hiring grants’. Where did your libtard brain pull that from?

http://roaringrepublican.com/ Nathan Harvey

I’m glad you agree that tax breaks are not stimulative, which most Republicans will not admit. That is a big step towards debating these issues rationally.

Paul Saunders

Your open advocacy for Totalitarian Statism and your attack on Individual Freedoms is refreshing. Most Democrat Maoists and RINOs work their linguistics to the bone trying to hide their advocacy for these despicable and anti-American points of view by burying them under a mountain of redefined words.

http://roaringrepublican.com/ Nathan Harvey

My open advocacy of rationally talking about the effects of tax breaks versus tax incentives stems from the fact that I am neither a Democrat, a Maoist, or a RINO. I am actually a classical libertarian that believes the only legitimate purpose of government is defensive, and that the way to resolve the budget deficit is to stop killing brown people afar to perpetuate a client-state economic system for cheap resources and vertical integration.

Of course, defense should include defense from both large size mammals and microscopic bacteria and fungi. Health care is the same government purpose as police and military. I can understand that you would think a clear delineation of government duties is Totalitarian Statism and an attack on Individual Freedoms, since you used a lot of avoidance words in your response to prevent making any distinctions that disagreed with your world view.

http://roaringrepublican.com/ Erol Bakkalbasi

Stop saying taxes are stealing – its dishonest, and you’re not actually making any logical points. In what alternative government do you possibly have 0% taxes.
Pingback: Friday 7.8 Show Notes « The Brazen 3