This blog is a response to a post on Facebook that simply grew too large to continue there. The original message, which was not made by me, touched on the hints of Socialism in Obama’s refundable tax credits. From there, a back-and-forth occurred with several different people, and the applicable portion of the latest comment is quoted below.

I definitely understand that Obama is not infallible and that some criticism of him is not baseless. In this case the criticism is misleading at best. All of the tax credits proposed are to go to people who work. For one, “welfare check” implies money from the government for those who don’t work. Those that do work still pay social security taxes and medicare taxes, as well as excise taxes on the gas you use or your telephone bill. These tax credits are designed to somewhat offset these taxes in particular. Currently, according to http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/813/, the government is giving nearly $53 billion in the same type of tax credits to some 57 million people who fall into the zero or negative income tax category. This has been supported strongly by republicans in the past because it helps to keep lower income people who work off of welfare and gives them more of an incentive to work. More…

What does that mean? Aside from Palin’s jab in her speech, it apparently means not really getting anything done. Have a look at the Wall Street Journal article. Amazing to me that Obama and the Democrats use this as an example of his experience (that and the Presidential campaign itself, strangely enough). From the article:

It is both funny and scary that one of America’s major political parties would offer this record of sheer futility as its nominee’s chief qualification to be president of the United States. Even more striking, though, is how alien the world in which Obama operated was by comparison with the world in which normal Americans live.

Reader, when your toilet breaks, do you wait around for some Ivy League hotshot to show up and organize a meeting so that you can use your collective strength to wring concessions from the powers that be?

Or do you call a plumber?

So while the Democrats are crying that Palin is fair game (I’ll agree that her record as a politician certainly is), the media seems to have been woefully inept in their hard-hitting coverage of Obama’s record. You’d think he’d keep mum about his futile attempts at helping the poor, hoping they wouldn’t find out just how much he didn’t accomplish in Chicago. But maybe I’m underestimating his confidence in the media’s support.

A quote from Larry Summers via Madeline Albright on CSPAN today. Albright:

The truth is that if you don’t own your land, you don’t have title to it, you don’t have the money or the interest to develop it or buy seeds or fertilizer, so it all goes together…

Now, she was talking about The Commission on Legal Empowerment for the Poor, an international group working to–obviously–empower the poor, especially in developing nations. But I would also add, this is exactly the reason property rights are so cherished and important in America. I would also argue that we should take the logic one step further. Nobody ever washes a rented car, and nobody ever takes care of things when they’re just handed out all the time. Disagree? Take a quick drive through some Section 8 housing and then get back to me.

There’s a difference, mind you. It’s like Dave Ramsey always says, poor is a state of mind. He’s been broke several times, but he’s never been poor.