Thomas Jefferson repudiates Obama's "Redistributive Change"

13 thoughts on “Thomas Jefferson repudiates Obama’s “Redistributive Change””

1. those words ring hollow considering the active role of slavery at the time.

   But I guess when you make no money, you can’t be taxed, so everybody’s happy right?

   Log in to Reply

2. your calling Reagan a Socialist and Palin a Commie

   Log in to Reply

3. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist-Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine-that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.“

   And let’s not forget about Alaskonomics

   As if it couldn’t support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.

   Log in to Reply

4. Explain whether or not that statement also represents a repudiation of this statement from Sarah Palin:

   For her part, Sarah Palin, who has lately taken to calling Obama “Barack the Wealth Spreader,” seems to be something of a suspect character herself. She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government’s activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year’s check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269. A few weeks before she was nominated for Vice-President, she told a visiting journalist-Philip Gourevitch, of this magazine-that “we’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.” Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it (“collectively,” no less), but finding it would require the analytic skills of Karl the Marxist.

   Log in to Reply
   1. Log in to Reply

   2. You can do it. I mean, if you can post diaries against theoretical (in the most tenuous sense) socialism, you can explain why Alaska’s system isn’t the same… Right?

      Log in to Reply

      1. Alaska’s Permanent Fund dividend is socialism?  Because on that, I’d disagree.

         But if it’s just the federal dollars that you’re talking about, of course, that certainly has socialistic flare.  🙂

         Log in to Reply

         1. than newsie could give me, which explains his silence.

            Log in to Reply

            1. Did it ever occur to you that the reason I said good bye a few months ago, is that I no longer have the time to post and respond every day.

               Several polsters asked me to continue, even if only occasionally, to comment and post.  

               This is the first time I have had in a while to catch up, but I must go soon as my grandchildren will be here.

               So here is your answer.  I don’t agree with the purists that believe the government should not own or control any land. I belive the government should not own and control most of the land, or even a larger portion than about 10% of the land, but not none. (I know Alaska has way too much of its land area controled by the government, but that is another issue for another day.)

               The system Sarah inherited is flawed.  She did no harm or much good in just adjusting this payment for the realities of the increased revenue.

               I think they should sell the land to the highest bidder (restricted to American Citizens) but that’s just me.  

               So long as any organization owns an asset, be it corporate or government, that organization should get the most the market will bear for that asset, and give the most the organization can to its shareholders.

               In this case, the government is the manager of the public lands, it pays for all the police, fire, judges, roads, etc in the state of Alaska, and still gives back to the citizens.  

               Sounds like a good capitalist corporation to me.

               Log in to Reply

               1. I don’t recall you saying goodbye. That’s okay, though – I tend to ignore those because a number of posters have said that but come back in short order. I believe it when they stay gone (e.g., Lauren Bacall).

                  I see, however, from your comment and diary history that you have been absent. So for that I apologize – I was being flip without cause. So, sorry.

                  As to your answer – it’s a good one, and it’s good to know you’re not a purist. It’s a pragmatic adaptation to existing conditions, and since pragmatism is in short supply in politics I welcome it anywhere I see it.

                  Nonetheless, I think that it still represents a contradiction between Palin’s rhetoric and her policies. If you’re going to go around accusing Obama of socialism, you’d better be squeaky clean on their part. Unless she’s proposing to do what you say, she’s simply full of hot air.

                  Log in to Reply

                  1. I kind of give her a pass on the whole Alaska system.  She had no part in its creation, and I don’t know much more about it than we discussed here.

                     There are way more important substitutive things Sarah has said and done that I would be far more interested in discussing, that are far more relevant to the job she is applying for.

                     No sales or income tax, if it wasn’t so far from the nearest Culver’s, I might move there.  I hear they have a way hot Governor too. Do they get family guy there, cause that and no income or sales tax might seal the deal.

                     Log in to Reply

                     1. I thought only the kids did… I need to get out more.

                        Log in to Reply

                        1. Mine is (Giggidy) laughing at Griffin Family values.

                           Log in to Reply