Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (92039)	10/27/2008 9:16:15 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541598

When he says "redistributive change" I'm pretty sure he means changing the access people have to opportunity and education- not so much other people's wallets. That's why he didn't say redistributing wealth". Of course you could say that all government services are "redistributive" because the rich never get the amount of service they pay for, and the very poor who can pay nothing, get served, albeit at a lower level. But I do not look at it that way. The rich, imo, buy a peaceful society (or more peaceful society) with their tax dollars. For all that we spend on education, and health services, and infrastructure, we get a society where the poor have some hope that they will not always be poor, and we also get a safety net that assures that most people won't starve, and most people won't be living on our streets- creating unrest, and ruining our cities. I think you really read Obama wrong on that one. I know there are people aching to paint Obama as a socialist, but he sure doesn't seem like one to me. And I say that as someone who likes a fair amount of socialism. So I'd actually like to see a more socialist president- but Obama isn't it. Which is fine. He's as good as it gets this election.

To: slacker711 who wrote (92039)	10/27/2008 9:21:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541598

There is a huge difference between community organizing with private but also public money and wholesale federal redistribution/entitlements. It's not necessarily a slippery slope, although it may be. I don't think we have enough info to determine where Obama is on that slope. I remain watchful and wary.

To: slacker711 who wrote (92039)	10/27/2008 2:52:17 PM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541598

>>I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change. In some ways we still suffer from that."<< Slacker - I see that statement as advocating the kinds of actions that get people moving up the economic ladder of success. To the extent that poor people begin to make more money, there is some redistributive change. I don't believe Obama is a guy who believes in just taking the money from the rich and writing checks to the poor. - Allen