Leftists Still Don’t Understand The “You Didn’t Build That”.

 

This is tickling me.  From HuffPo, of course…..

image

My two favorite big government socialists. 

Mitt Romney Ohio Ad Stars Business Owner Who Relied Heavily On Government Contracts

Here’s the offending ad.

 

The leftists then note that the company he owns deals in government contracts.  They then state this….

The Obama campaign may take comfort in knowing that, through these web ads, the Romney campaign is seemingly making its point for them. This is not the first time that a businessman tapped by the Romney campaign to whack the president for acknowledging the government’s role in a company’s economic success has, himself, relied on the government to help with his business.

This is what they don’t understand.  First of all, describing the government, of the people, by the people, and for the people as a separate entity from the people demolishes the American view of democracy.   There is no “government” which is acting outside the will of the populous.  In the view of an American, it is that the government is simply an extension of the will of the people. 

Secondly, and this may be even more important than the first point,  framing the argument as Warren and Obama have, implies the government independently provided something of value.  It did not.  There is no government wealth other than what was derived from the industry and commerce of the American public.  Their argument also implies an inherent right to the wealth derived from the industry and commerce of the American public.  There is no such right.  It is our money.  The government is simply a tool in which we seek a more efficient form of allocation.  This is what builds the roads and hires the teachers and provides for the common defense —–  our will, our wealth, our industry, our commerce.  The government is simply the vehicle to accomplish certain things. 

And, lastly, the implication of both Warren and Obama is that somehow business owners lucked out.  They state there are plenty of smart people, there are plenty of hard workers, and that the teachers and roads and defense are the reasons for their success.  But, it’s an illogical argument.  All of us are equal owners of the roads, all of us have equal access to education, all of us share in the bounties created by the American industry and commerce built and hired via the vehicle we call government.  Business owners today and yesterday and God willing, tomorrow. are the people with new ideas, the ones who take risks, they often time stake their entire fortune on their business.  Often to poor ends.  They are the ones who make things go in this country.  So, let’s dispense with the idea that what they’ve built, what they’ve created is somehow owed to some benign and merciful governmental entity.  The very idea is anathema to the principles and ideas of American form of democracy. 

The industry and commerce of the American people is the wealth of this nation.  There is none other.  Business owners provide the vehicles for wealth creation for the owners and workers.  The government’s existence is derived and owed to such industry and commerce.  It is not the other way around.  The roads built and the workers hired only occurred because of the industry and commerce of the American people.  We, the American people, by our industry and commerce, through businesses created, financed, created, and caused the government, a vehicle of a more efficient form of allocation for limited things, to occur.  In other words, stating that the government did anything is to say that we the people, through our industry and commerce did these things. 

So, HuffPo, Warren, Obama, and the rest, you people keep talking about this.  Keep bringing this up.  Keep reminding the people how we owe our existence to the benevolent mercies of our rulers,  you sad, sick, SOBs.  Keep telling the people how we owe a debt of gratitude to people and governments, mired in complacency and incompetency, for doing in a very small part the very things we hired them to do.  Your message runs contrary to the entire foundations of this nation, and the pillars which keep it erect today. 

This entry was posted in Economics, News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Leftists Still Don’t Understand The “You Didn’t Build That”.

  1. jimash1 says:

    May I borrow this well framed argument ?

    • suyts says:

      Of course. Links and attaboys are appreciated, but this is for public consumption so have at it!

      • jimash1 says:

        I like to make it clear that I am using someone elses words,and will display your nome de plume, but in this case there are undesirable elements, that at this time I would feel uncomfortable, giving
        proper links to, because there are quite a few stalkers.
        If you want them I can edit my post.
        If THEY insist in links I may let that be your call.

        The above post is very well said and needs to be said.
        ( I would replace “none other” with “no other”. )

      • suyts says:

        I trust your judgment in both rewording and attribution. ….. But, leftist stalker types are more amusing than anything.

        • jimash1 says:

          ” But, leftist stalker types are more amusing than anything.”

          I shudder at the thought.
          And Thank You.

  2. jimash1 says:

    I’m thinking that the President finds this “someone else” rhetoric attractive because HIS parents didn’t vote or pay taxes or choose to live in the US and be part of that system that he supposes is an ephemeral “someone else “.

    • suyts says:

      Sununu had it right the first time. Obama needs to learn how to be an American. Many of his life experiences were outside the norm of people growing up in the time period he did.

  3. kim2ooo says:

    This is the BEST article on this subject I’ve read – so far!

    My wordpress “like” and “repost ” has gone missing for the time being…but will be reposting this.

    • suyts says:

      Thanks, I’m glad you guys like it. I tried to capture exactly what it is that pisses people off when they hear this, but articulating an emotion is trick. But, this, which goes to the foundation of our country and has continued throughout the history of our nation is what their message is attacking.

  4. leftinbrooklyn says:

    ‘There is no “government” which is acting outside the will of the populous.’

    Except, that’s exactly what does occur, when they campaign on lies to gain office, or flip-flop on campaign platforms during their time in office, or promote absurd new policy after achieving office. As ‘liberal-on-steroids’ as my city is, I still find it hard to believe a platform of “I’m Gonna Tell You What Size Soft Drink You Can Buy” would have gained re-election for our mayor. And I don’t need to even begin to mention the current occupant of the White House.

    Politicians have had our distrust for decades, for very good reason.

    • suyts says:

      Yes, the choices of some of my fellow citizens are …… perplexing. Now we’re into breast feeding and baby formula. … why is that lunatic still there?

      • leftinbrooklyn says:

        I’m afraid it’s all tied to reasons any liberal, socialist system exists: Many of the populace want the nanny state. They believe a life-long government appointed baby-sitter is the answer. They’ll give me free stuff! Yet anyone with more sense than a child should see how not free it is…

        I’ll never understand it…

    • ThePhDScientist says:

      Your mayor is not exactly a huge leftist. And wouldn’t most of the Christian crazies that make up the right wing nutters be in favor of Mayor Bloomberg trying to combat the cardinal sin of gluttony?

  5. G. Combs says:

    From my point of view business, especially small business operate INSPITE of the government. The Institute for Justice (Leftist) did a study showing how stifling government red tape can be. See: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-21-mellor26_st_N.htm

    The flip side is the corporate -government revolving door where cartels of international corporations write bills that will kill off the competition but are “exempt” because their former employees run the FDA, USDA, DOE, EPA or whatever
    For an example see: http://www.whistleblower.org/storage/documents/Shielding_the_Giant_Final_PDF.pdf

    I am at the point now where I view the US government as “THE ENEMY” who is out to get me. The dollarite bunny story, and others, is enough to strike terror in the heart of every farmer if they have any brains. See: http://bobmccarty.com/2011/06/27/animal-rights-activism-fuels-usda-rabbit-chase/

    As small farmers we were told we would be “Exempt” from the regs aimed at “big Business” ~ that is straight from Senator Burr (R -NC) who co-sponsored the final bill.
    Here is how the FDA interprets “Exempt” http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FSMA/ucm268229.htm

    Like having some bureaucrat write the regs “in plain language” and giving us an extra 6 mos or 18 mos to comply is going to help when you already work a full time job AND run a farm. To use the Dollarites as an example, Farmers are supposed to run around 100ac farms every day with a darn paint brush just to make sure I do not have a 1/4″ speck of rust anywhere?

    Obama thinks this type of crud is HELPING business???? Especially small business??? GRRRrrrrr

    • suyts says:

      Hopefully, Romney will have the sense to dial back some of these draconian regs.

      “From my point of view business, especially small business operate INSPITE of the government.” That’s exactly right, but conversely, there’s no way the government exists without us.

  6. DirkH says:

    Thomas Sowell: profits are the least-understood aspect of business, and have been under attack since the days of Karl Marx and George Bernard Shaw, who called profits arbitrary “overcharges” motivated by greed.
    on poptech:
    http://acckkii.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/peak-oil-the-rp-ratio-re-visited-by-poptech/
    source: Washtimes:
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/may/15/20060515-122820-6110r/?page=all

    In the soviet union, profits were forbidden.

    http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/aprice/2012/02/11/the-politics-of-star-trek-patterns-of-force/
    ( a folded comment;
    “From Time magazine’s 1938 article on Hitler:
    The “socialist” part of National Socialism might be scoffed at by hard-&-fast Marxists, but the Nazi movement nevertheless had a mass basis.
    The 1,500 miles of magnificent highways built, schemes for cheap cars and simple workers’ benefits, grandiose plans for rebuilding
    German cities made Germans burst with pride.

    ***

    The Nazi credo that the individual belongs to the state also applies to business. Some businesses have been confiscated outright,
    on others what amounts to a capital tax has been levied. Profits have been strictly controlled. Some idea of the increasing Governmental
    control and interference in business could be deduced from the fact that 80% of all building and 50% of all industrial orders in Germany
    originated last year with the Government. Hard-pressed for foodstuffs as well as funds, the Nazi regime has taken over large estates and
    in many instances collectivized agriculture, a procedure fundamentally similar to Russian Communism. “

    • suyts says:

      I thought everyone understood that Nixon’s price controls are what caused our shortages?

      • DirkH says:

        Norman Dodd
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Dodd
        Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Ford Foundation, and the Rockefeller Foundation
        “Mr. Dodd, we operate under directives, the substance of which is that we shall use our grant making power so to alter life in the United States that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.””
        Although this is an off record statement, and is a contemporary, not primary, source, the essence of this
        claim can be corroborated by looking at other evidence. In 1972, a White House conference led by Roy Ash
        pushed for the beginning of a World Economic Community around 1990 [5], and in 1985 the United States and
        the Soviet Union agreed on a merger of education systems, and continued further policy mergers until 1990.
        The title of the document corroborating this claim, signed by George Shultz, is The General Agreement Between
        the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
        on Contacts, Exchanges, and Cooperation in Scientific, Technical, Cultural, and other fields.[6]
        6 = http://americandeception.com/index.php?action=downloadpdf&photo=PDFsml_AD/Agreement_Between_US_and_USSR_in_all_Educational_Fields-1990-41pgs-GOV-EDU.sml.pdf&id=187
        von 1972 (NIXON!)

  7. gofer says:

    He’s trying to make all the people sitting on their asses, sucking up entitilements, feel like they have contributed to the success of others, so they will feel even more entitled. They deserve those handouts because they helped make others successful………….

  8. philjourdan says:

    An interesting dichotomy of the left. On the one hand, they try to argue (without coming right out and stating it) that government should pay for no services or goods. So that any payment for services or goods rendered is a government handout (as they are trying to do here). They want to basically rewrite the laws of economics.

    Yet on the other hand, they argue that government should pay premiums to those who WORK for the government. That since they are dedicating their life to public “service” they should be compensated above and beyond that of the private sector (see Wisconsin Public Employee Unions).

    And they never see the conflict between the 2 equally absurd ideas. Public Service has to be compensated richly (but then is it not just public employment?), but no one can charge the government for any goods or services.

  9. ThePhDScientist says:

    Is it a strawman when you completely misrepresent the arguments of the opposition? I’ve listened to Elizabeth Warren and her very accurate argument would be more correctly stated as this: since you used American roads, police force, fire fighters etc. in building and running your factory then you don’t get to pay zero percent in income taxes as many of the top 30 corporations in the US have done. You have to give some back – as the rest of us do. I know I pay more than 20%, why do corporations profitting millions not have to pay any? And why does Mitt Romney who makes at least 200 times my salary pay only 14%? Is financial engineering that much more beneficial to society than medicine and science that we all agreed to grant him this significant tax break? hmmmmm

    • suyts says:

      Ph, the top 30 isn’t who she was talking to and that’s not who received her message. You want to eliminate corporate welfare? I’m all for it. Let’s quit pretending it has anything to do with people of incomes over $200,000. It doesn’t. And, let’s be clear. We, the people built those roads, we the people hired the firemen and policemen. There’s nothing to “pay back”, because we already paid for it! There is no homage to pay. Not from me, not from you.

      Without getting into the percentage wars, which I’ll be more than happy to after this comment….. he makes 200 times your salary? I’m guessing his share of the roads with his 14% is much greater than your share at 20%. How much do you think Romney should be punished for succeeding? Does he get to own a more equal part of the roads and police protection? Or is it simply because he makes more he should pay more for the same services?

    • philjourdan says:

      Nice strawman, but as usual, untrue. Warren (and Obama) clearly said it took a village to build your business. As the roads were built by the PEOPLE (with their taxes, which the businesses paid as well), the government really did not do a thing. Except skim its vigorish.

      The fallacy of their arguments is that NOT EVERYONE builds businesses with the SAME assets. Those that do build them, invest themselves. The others refuse to take the risks.

      It only takes a village idiot to claim credit where none is due. And we have 2 running for office this year.

    • kim2ooo says:

      I’ve listened to Elizabeth Warren and her very accurate argument would be more correctly stated as this: ”

      xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
      Logic would dictate if :her very accurate argument: WAS indeed, an accurate argument…There would be no need… for your attempt to “more correctly stated as this: “.

      She was not addressing the Top 30.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s