Obama (edited) news - Conservatives of ModDB

So then Barack Obama has declaered "I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions ofJohnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln — just in terms of what we’ve gotten done in modern history".

He says his accomplishments are even better than that of George Washington and Ronald Reagen, so heares a list of his acomplishments: Borrowed money from China and donated it to China, Increased the federal deficet tremendosly even more than Bush, Increased unemployment a very large amount, suported the wall street protests. So heares my opinion on Obama. I think that he needs to stop wasting Americas money and not call himself the fourth greatest President I mean realy the wall street protests arent helping any one and theare wasting tax payer dollars. But thats just my opinion.

Worth mentioning that Obama has put the US $30 trillion more in debt since he became president, that is double the amount when he took office, and considering the previous 43 presidents only managed to put us in $30 trillion. Another thing is Obama is a collectivist, see this "We didn't build it" speech.

Obama said to paraphrase; You didn't build it, not by yourself. You had employees, you had a great teacher in high school that is responsible for your success. You drove on government roads and bridges that society invested in through taxes so they own a slice of your success or wealth, you didn't build it, we built it. This is a huge disagreement between individualists, rationalists and objectivists with Obama's cooky suggestion that individuals don't create the wealth. Where all that creativity or innovation comes from is individuals, that raises millions of people out of poverty or increases well-being substantially, the iphone, the great book, the visionary, the inventor, the creator does it. The voluntary choice or trade is a win-win, labor is the same type of trade. You wouldn't take it if you weren't better off doing it. But the funny thing is that the wealthy are the ones who through taxes pay for the roads or bridges, its stolen wealth, somebody first has to create something worth while (made by being definitively demanded and with definitive principles) for that stealing to occur. They are the primary creators then of those roads or bridges built by stolen wealth, its individuals again. Society doesn't owns our wealth, or collectively own all the wealth, it belongs to individuals should decide, spend or what to do with that wealth. Society may not like what you do, what you look like or what you think, which causes votes or unlimited democracy to vote to take people's money away. Libertarians believe in this. This is why its being brought up here, that Obama is not basing his worldview, if it even is one, on being reasonable.

Fairness or justice is what you get what you deserve, in economics its based on how much you add to the wealth. If you produce alot then you should be able to get alot, some people don't produce much or are mediocre then thats fairness or justice, not equality. If someone who produces a little and gets alot then thats equality, thats immoral or unjust and unfair. Libertarian believes in this because it shows that he or she is a ethical person who recognizes when injustice seems to take place when equality demands that we shrink the bigger business or successful business man by redistributing all the wealth or much of the wealth. 80% marginal income tax, a yearly 10% wealth tax to pay how much you have in total, by knocking down bringing down the wealthy or successful people. That doesn't help poor people much but it does bring the wealth down or the rich down. Its premised on the idea that the world is a zero-sum game. That the only way to gain is to take from someone else, that only stuff is there it isn't created or innovated into existence, its always somebody elses loss for somebody to gain. That idea implicitly held by leftists is false. Through out the 19th century and early 20th century we had a explosion of innovation because of relative freedom compared to what we have now. Its mostly deregulated. While the most trouble now is from the financial industry that is the most regulated out of any industry, with bail outs. We just created something that didn't exist before, wealth was created that got out us out of the rut of technological, spiritual and ideological stagnation of the past. That was pioneered and sported by the best society has to offer, the men and women of science, art and industry.

That wealth wasn't taken from anybody, we are both better off by buying something that increases well-being. We are both having our lives improved by buying something innovative. We weren't robbed or exploited of that product or service, we where given something that didn't exist before and we became aware of something that we never knew we wanted. Both lives, the creator and buyers, lives have been improved. All that socialist economists do is that they see that one side loses 20 dollars and the other side gains all those 20 dollars thus they count it as inequality. Then look for ways to bring down those billionaires, eventhough you become a billionaire is by selling lots of things to loads of people - again definitive demand with definitive principles (Napoleon Hill). By selling products or services that make our lives better (Yaron Brook).