Obama Tells Entrepreneurs “You Didn’t Build” Your Business. Is he right?
Semper Fi
2012/07/16 22:40:56
|
|
|||||
|
8 votes
|
|
7% | |||
|
105 votes
|
|
86% | |||
|
9 votes
|
|
7% | |||
That sound you hear is silence—as millions of small business owners and entrepreneurs were left speechless this weekend from President Obama’s latest insult.
The slap in the face to hard-working Americans conveyed Obama’s belief that it takes a village—a heavily subsidized village—to create that venture you’re profiting from:
"Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Obama pushed his policy goals of infrastructure (aka stimulus) spending and “government research” as part of a collectivist utopia “doing things together.” It’s simply stunning that he would tell Americans, “If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that.”
After all, could individuals be resourceful and hard-working enough to create whole new enterprises? Obama said:
"Look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart."
Read More: http://blog.heritage.org/2012/07/16/morning-bell-o...
Top Opinion
-
darcie lamar 2012/07/16 23:15:36NO
+21I would wager a bet that Obama never created a business that showed a profit - except for the millions he made off his books that are a fantasy. Did he work 10 hours a day, seven days a week like most small business owners? Right now this POTUS is living high off our tax dollars as he destroys our country. Obama and Michelle are grifters.
Actually - it SHOULD be the job of the Poster to post the facts - not edited statements.
Here’s the full context of what he said:
We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make some more cuts in programs that don’t work, and make government work more efficiently…We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more…
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and ...
Here’s the full context of what he said:
We’ve already made a trillion dollars’ worth of cuts. We can make some more cuts in programs that don’t work, and make government work more efficiently…We can make another trillion or trillion-two, and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more…
There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me, because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business. you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.
So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.”
why would RWNJ want to know about full context?
they are too busy drooling over their pet websites, looking for talking points.
Come on NOVEMBER....I CAN'T WAIT TO FLUSH THIS TURD!
ahhh.... that's what it is....
'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.'
The government is a giant leech sucking all the decency, morality and money out of society and sending us a bill for doing such a great job of lording over us.
tax policy, and its implications, is not a hard concept to grasp.
but no. one of your overlords come up with a meme and you guys just embrace it...
i swear...
how about you?
Unsatisfied with Solow's explanation, economists worked to "endogenize" technology in the 1980s. They developed the endogenous growth theory that includes a mathematical explanation of technological advancement.[19][20] This model also incorporated a new concept of human capital, the skills and knowledge that make workers productive. Unlike physical capital, human capital has increasing rates of return. Therefore, overall there are constant returns to capital, and economies never reach a steady state. Growth does not slow as capital accumulates, but the rate of growth depends on the types of capital a country invests in. Research done in this area has focused on what increases human capital (e.g. education) or technological change (e.g. innovation).[21]
care to tell me how what that has to do with the price of tea in China?
steady state? the steady state we're stuck in is very similar to Jimmy Carter's 'malaise.' doing what we've been doing hasn't worked. why would anyone reasonably expect it to work on the fourth try?
are you saying that gov't determines the direction of investments? as we can see by Solyndra, that theory doesn't hold a lot of water.
So, Mr. Economics Expert, care to explain how publicly funded roads, bridges, police, firefighters, etc. equate to communism? That is the point you made that I was responding to.
and its a false equivalence.
when economies are small, everybody has to do everything. as they grow, in population, wealth and economic development, you get specialization. something like a sheriff or a school teacher.
even bigger, you get things like public buildings and main roads paved.
and that is ALL contingent on wealth creation. look at Bangladesh. THAT'S the kind of existence you get when wealth creation can't keep up.
Obama, and his ilk, think that gov't can do whatever it likes. spend as much as it feels like, regulate for the fun of it, with no repercussion on tax revenue.
if Bush2 cut the marginal rates and tax revenue increased, how on god's green earth does Obama and his crones think that raising taxes will create more revenue? as i heard Mike Huckabee note on NPR last night, Obama must have the IQ of broccoli to think that raising taxes, now, will be anything but destructive.
"i've seen this before.... why does it seem so familar?
ahhh.... that's what it is....
'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.'"
Perhaps you could explain what you meant if you're now claiming that you weren't drawing a false equivalence between things like roads, bridges, cops and firefighters with communism.
my problem is with the idea that business benefits from the munificence of the kohlkoz ..ummmm collective.
that bridge and police and GOVERNMENT thing is thin-gruel Warren-style communism, now being espoused by Obama.
we can only afford gov't with a functioning private sector. under Obama is been limping along for his entire term.
and now he says THIS?
And does this...
"The Congress shall have Power To...provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;"
...sound like "thin-gruel Warren-style communism" to you?
Obama's attempt to co opt that theory by -my god- by having gov't take CREDIT for it is simply ridiculous.
the general welfare clause? cmon. the only things that we are supposed to look at the gov't for are life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not having the general welfare clause used as an excuse to take from one to give to another.
under this administration, like no other before it, take from our kids and grandkids to provide for our current comfort.
post offices? whose cost spiral out of control and have lost almost its entire relevance?
to set up a patent office?
cmon...
amazingly, he demeans those that create a business by hard work, smarts or even luck.
its a meme of disparagement. a corollary to his hatred of wealth.
And what exactly is demeaning about saying that "...when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative", while also acknowledging "but also because we do things together"? Is "doing things together", as Americans have always done, really that offensive to you?
the Interstate highway system was a defense program, anyway.
your local property taxes pay for those men with badges, because you and your neighbors vote to do so. tomorrow, you and your neighbors could vote to NOT fund them, too.
'WE succeed because of our INDIVIDUAL initiative?' that doesn't make any sense.
or it does if you consider that equivalent to 'from each according to his ability to each according to their need.'
Obama's belief that gov't is the REASON for that success is ridiculous. actually, if you consider that all the 'gov't' that 'makes us better' exists for everyone, its not a factor in somebody 'building that better mousetrap' because in Obama's inane world everyone could.
it was an heinous statement and its made worse by the clownoscenti that try and rationalize it. its indefensible.
Where did I say that exactly? Your inability to respond without putting words in my mouth is quite telling. Now how about answering the actual question. What have FedEx and UPS' trucks driven on since day one?
"your local property taxes pay for those men with badges, because you and your neighbors vote to do so. tomorrow, you and your neighbors could vote to NOT fund them, too."
Yes. Your point?
"'WE succeed because of our INDIVIDUAL initiative?' that doesn't make any sense."
Individuals taking the initiative to create a business makes no sense to you? Okay.
"or it does if you consider that equivalent to 'from each according to his ability to each according to their need.'"
Ahhh ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaa!!!!!
"Obama's belief that gov't is the REASON for that success is ridiculous."
again with putting words in people's mouths. Seems it's the only way you know how to operate. Obama said no such thing. He said "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help". Not that "gov't is the REASON for that success". Biiiig difference between acknowledging a helpful contribution and declaring something THE reason. Obama did the former.
they drove on something that everyone else drove on going about their lives. when Eisenhower pushed the interstate system, it was for defense.. who knew that over the road trucking would break the back of the railroads because of it.
those men in badges are discretionary tax 'purchases.' they have nothing to do with the risk taking and initiative in starting or running a business.
___________________________
evidently you missed how the words 'WE' and the 'INDIVIDUAL' are used in that sentence. reread it again. maybe you can figure it out for yourself without me putting words in your mouth.
keep laughing chuckles. he's some sort of idiot socialist savant and you guys lap it up.
if you are successful, YOU are successful. not ANYONE around you. no matter how much the president needs to make his troops believe it.
you don't seem to know what the difference between 'contribution' and 'commitment' are. he's claiming credit for a contribution. one that is vastly undeserved.
i suspect that this comment, alone, could be his political Waterloo...
Paraphrase away, but you are indeed putting words in my mouth when your supposed "paraphrasing" has no relation whatsoever to what I've actually said. In this case, I never even came close to saying that the government made FedEx or UPS successes. I only asked if they were using roads to drive their trucks on because you said they weren't doing so prior to the Obama administration. So a little intellectual honesty from you would be nice.
On this critique: "evidently you missed how the words 'WE' and the 'INDIVIDUAL' are used in that sentence. reread it again. maybe you can figure it out for yourself...", all I can say is give it a rest. If you can't follow what's being stated here, then you're either willfully trying not to, or you're far more stupid than you appear to be. It conveys a very simple, clear point that references "individuals" among "we" the broader society.
"if you are successful, YOU are successful. not ANYONE around you."
There you go putting words in people's mouths again. No one claimed what you're saying here. All Obama said was that "If you were successful, SOMEBODY along the line GAVE YOU SOME HELP". Try to comprehend that before misrepresenting it yet again.