On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Leland F. Jackson, CPA <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm still not clear about what is meant by President Obama, > when he is referring to a redistribution of wealth, or how > the constitution could be used to actively guarantee > political and economic justice.
I don't think he thinks it can. I think he plainly states that he thinks it's fatally flawed. Which goes against your contention that he loves our constitution and form of government. His concept of redistribution of wealth is basically "rob peter to pay paul" because he alone knows what "economic justice" is, and will use the monopoly of force of government to make it happen. > > 1) President Obama could be talking about a progressive > income tax, which results in redistribution of wealth, but > legislatively, this is already a done deal. Look at this! You're starting to think critically! I take back what I said about your mind being more inert than the blob. (Oh man I noticed you just posted again while I'm writing.... I hope I don't regret what I just said....) > > 2) He could be talking about a constitution that provides a > safety net in the form of guaranteed retire and medical > benefits to the elderly, like is provided by social security > and medicare, but this also is already legislative law. Keep going, you're showing signs of intellectual life. > > 3) Perhaps he is talking about a constitution that > guarantees each individual has a chance to compete on equal > term economically, (eg equal pay to ensure some minimum > standard of living). Whatever that is. > > 4) I'm not sure how the constitution could be used to > redistribute wealth and provide political and economic > justice. How would you assess a minimum value to be > received by the various groups, for example? How would you > comply with the economic law of a free laze fair > capitalistic economy, which laws are almost as fundamental > as the laws of physics? He cannot do it without ignoring those laws and violating all the provisions in the constitution guaranteeing private property rights. Which is consonant with how he's gone about nationalizing the car industry and other ideologically motivated actions occasioned by the current "opportunity" (that's what Rahm calls a crisis). - Publius > > Regards, > > LelandJ > _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
