Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
“Somebody Made That Happen”
Here’s all you need to know about what, exactly, Barack Obama thinks about business — the small kind, the large kind, the family kind, the any kind:
It’s almost too perfect, isn’t it? And I especially love that turn of phrase — “somebody made that happen.”
It’s always somebody for the left, isn’t it? Somebody will pay. Somebody will do it.
Published in General
It is too long to post here, but The Washington Times has the complete quote. In my opinion, greater length doesn’t do more than reinforce the Castro-in-English feel. ·4 minutes ago
It’s one straw man argument after another. He is basically saying that no one can succeed completely on their own, an idea that no one would dispute.
But the debate isn’t about extreme individualism vs. people doing things together. To me, it’s about what is the best way to coordinate people – through top down centralized planning or through a decentralized “market” process. As smart as Obama claims to be, I honestly don’t think he understands this.
He simply can’t fathom the notion that people will work together and coordinate their activities without a central authority in command of it all.
And he certainly won’t accept the possibility that a decentralized market process will produce better outcomes.
Ben, I like where you’re going here- but in this case, someone else DID make that happen! :) Nice work SEAL Team 6 !!
Stop quoting the rules, it makes you look like an [expletive]. ·2 hours ago
No, it doesn’t. It helps keep the environment of Ricochet civil. We all need to redouble our efforts, time to time, to keep the spirit and letter of the CoC.
But if “somebody else” made the business “happen,” why is it the business owner who gets stuck with the taxes?
No, it doesn’t. It helps keep the environment of Ricochet civil. We all need to redouble our efforts, time to time, to keep the spirit and letter of the CoC.
It appears that your sense of humor is broken.
Might want to see to that.
althouse thinks this election is going to be about Capitalism vs Socialism. Is mitt romney up to the task in defending Capitalism? ·5 hours ago
In all fairness to Romney, there are way too many conservatives who also have trouble defending capitalism. It really is a shame.
Aggghhh, Dave I hate it when you not only beat me to the punch but also say it better than I would have!! Well said!
The other thing “somebody made happen” were grants to cowboy poetry festivals in Utah. Somebody shut down the Keystone pipeline. Somebody passed the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized nations. Somebody threw “stimulus” money around to the states, which then used it to shore up their currently unsustainable spending levels.
This “somebody” is a politician who will gladly spend trillions of dollars he himself doesn’t have to stay in office, and then will chastise you for asking whether or not it’s a good idea to pursue these policies.
This way leads to madness, and destruction. He’s essentially arguing that you can’t argue with him, simply because it’s so. This is like a day spending roughly 185% of his income, then telling his wife and kids, “Hey, somebody made that happen”.
Barry is infantilism run wild. He is the distilled product of demonstrably broken educational system/industry. Somebody made that happen, too – we did, by allowing it to continue unchecked as it traveled this path into lunacy.
To me, it’s about what is the best way to coordinate people – through top down centralized planning or through a decentralized “market” process. As smart as Obama claims to be,I honestly don’t think he understands this.
What Obama understands is that without top-down planning controlled by an educated elite who think like him, his side loses. You think this is about the most effective way to get to desirable ends like full employment. Obama thinks about who wields power, who calls the shots … in Lenin’s famous question “kto – kogo?”—a Russian grammatical construction which means ‘who [takes action toward] whom.’ Preeminent concern for power relationships is the hallmark of Leftist thinking. Obama doesn’t seek your sort of ‘understanding’ about what works “best” in the ‘real world.’ Obama said he’d accept less tax revenues if it meant the rich paid more taxes since that would be more “fair.” This is exactly the point Margaret Thatcher makes about socialists in the link at comment #19. Uneconomical outcomes do not concern Leftists, a critical point to grasp if you want to comprehend the Soviet Union, Castro’s Cuba or Obama’s America.
Brilliant riposte, absolutely brilliant.
Brilliant riposte, absolutely brilliant.
Except, in truth, the consumer of whatever is being bought and sold pays those taxes . . . businesses just collect them for the government. Those taxes get passed on in the cost of everything we buy. It can’t be otherwise or there really would be a free lunch.
It does violate the CoC….
It might not seem important, but the distinctive Ricochet culture of politeness is maintained, in part, by a broken windows policy. The concept of acceptable breaches undermines the bright line rule, and it’s an important line to maintain. ·21 minutes ago
Stop quoting the rules, it makes you look like an [expletive]. ·15 hours ago
LOL, Sorry I started this side argument! Luke, appreciate your sense of humor, brother, but I am well rebuked by James and Mollie. Never thought of Malcolm Gladwell’s broken window theory (actually I can’t remember if he coined that phrase or just popularized it) applied to blogs/internet posts, but the analogy is apt. I suffer from the effects of two and a half decades of Army Infantry and Combat Engineer influence on my vocabulary. There is a euphemism for fornicating which, in the Army, serves as noun/verb/adjective/adverb for responding to full on stupidity. I’m trying to break the habit but the POTUS’ comment sent me into full [expletive] mode. I’m conscious of the hypocrisy I display by not taming my tongue (and typing). Please pray for me!
Here’s the graf in which the idiocy was deposited:
Especially if the fire spread to his army of straw men.
They have really latched onto this thing where we owe our success to the government building roads…just before that remark he says: “Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges.” Does he really think that before the federal interstate system was built people just stayed home, wishing the government would help them get from place to place??? He’s basically saying that without government assistance, we are too stupid to succeed.
Especially if the fire spread to his army of straw men. ·24 minutes ago
It takes a freaking village
James Taggert himself couldnt have set it better;
h/t http://smous.biz/aynrand_atlasshrugged.html
Edited 6 hours ago
Sorry! He really set me off on that one.
How can people who support him not see that this is absolutely anathema to what this country was founded on? This is outright contempt for free enterprise. The man is a socialist, who can deny it any longer?!?!!??!!?
I can.
Since the Obama administration does not generally support government ownership of the means of production, but rather sees itself as financier and regulator of privately-held enterprise, the term you’re actually looking for is fascist.
Signed,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Pedant
I would assume that those great teachers and roads are used by everyone, or at least a good number of people – how come only a very few of them create successful businesses? Must be random chance.
If the people of this country reject a successful businessman who has helped produce hundreds of successful businesses which in turn employ thousands of people in favor of a clueless Marxist than they will get exactly the economy they deserve – the crappy one we now have.
This is boilerplate leftist twaddle, which I hear all the time when talking to my left-wing friends. We’re all one big giant community, and therefore, no one succeeds alone.
If you’re smart, it’s because the community raised you, educated you, and kept you safe and nourished during your formative years.
If you come up with a good idea and start a business, you’re leaning on the community to succeed. The more success you have, the more of the community’s resources you are using up. You put more trucks on the roads, you need an educated workforce (educated in public schools), you need the government to protect you, etc.
Therefore, the more success you have, the more indebted you are to the people around you, and it’s only good and proper that you should pay more in taxes to compensate them for all they’ve done to make your success happen.
Of course, this ignores the fact that those employees were hired through mutual agreement and paid a fair wage, that your trucks pay gasoline taxes, and that you are providing a product that already benefits the ‘community’ or they wouldn’t buy it.
<Cont’d> But Obama’s remarks are a very clear example of how the right and left differ, and it goes all the way back to Rousseau vs Locke. Are we free people born with the innate right to make our way through life by engaging in commerce and other activities in mutual agreement with fellow free citizens, and with no one having the right to take what we earn or coerce us into activities we choose not to do? Or are we born as members of a collective with responsibilities to an entity greater than ourselves?
The left believes the latter. They believe that if people don’t succeed, it’s because they were exploited or because they are unlucky enough to have talents that society doesn’t reward, and therefore they are victims of unfairness.
On the other hand, if you are successful it’s because society lifted you up, and you therefore owe society. In the meantime, the rights of the collective trump the rights of the individual, so long as the ‘greater good’ can be invoked.
Romney should fight this battle from first principles, and tear Obama apart for saying what he did.
Perhaps the same applies to the mans biography Ghostwriter and Obamas book sales.
Maybe it’s because I’ve answered too many life questions on LinkedIn lately, but Obama’s comments struck me as particularly revealing. Not in his attitude toward business, but his attitude toward intelligence or, perhaps, ambition.
The picture is one of a person who, at least in his own mind, never measured up to his peers.
He doesn’t credit the individual because that is an arena where he fears to compete. He hasn’t had to, groups around him always insulated him from that competition. Now, he’s in a contest with a guy who understands business, who has competed successfully in that arena. The president, instead of trying to overcome his deficiency, takes the approach of a ten year-old and says, “Oh, yeah, well business is stupid! Nyah, nyah!”
I feel sorry for the guy. Let’s all take a little pressure off of him in November.
I can.
Since the Obama administration does not generally support government ownership of the means of production, but rather sees itself as financier and regulator of privately-held enterprise, the term you’re actually looking for isfascist.
Signed,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Pedant ·59 minutes ago
Fair enough, though I think it is a small step for him to get there with that comment. It borders on, if it is not already, a tacit assertion that there can be no such thing as private property.
Regardless of where he was born, Obama’s sentiments are flatly un-American.
sounds like elizabeth warren.
althouse thinks this election is going to be about Capitalism vs Socialism. Is mitt romney up to the task in defending Capitalism?
[redacted for CoC]
“You want to provide free MRI’s and free vaccines and free health care? Where do they think these things came from? Somebody made that happen!” ·49 minutes ago
“If UBL was killed, I didn’t do that. Somebody else made that happen.”
It does violate the CoC.
It might not seem important, but the distinctive Ricochet culture of politeness is maintained, in part, by a broken windows policy. The concept of acceptable breaches undermines the bright line rule, and it’s an important line to maintain.