I was going to say 'more cowbell.'

~Zoo

No Stevendedalus, taking from the earners to give to the non-earners is not a prescription for the economy.  But for disaster.  If Obama does as he says, we will not have to wait long to see that you are wrong, and I am right.

YOu cant make a poor person rich if his choice is to be poor.

Are you on a prescription?

Back to Marx again, eh? Few choose poverty or monkish existence. Some homelessness, granted, is by choice, but most are mentally or physically sick.

True.  However, I doubt that most poor people wake up in the morning and say to themselves "Well, I can either be productive and make money, or continue to be extremely poor.  Looks like I'll keep being poor!"

Yeah, clearly unlikely. 

But if you penalize productivity then what is the motivation to produce?  Take a regular old 9-5 job for example.  If Joe, a guy who works his ass off coming in early and staying late completing all assigned early and taking on extra tasks, and Bob, a guy who comes in at 9 and leaves at 5 doing completeing all tasks on time but taking on no extra tasks, each are paid the same and get the same raise each year where is the motivation for Joe to continue working his ass off?  Now if Joe were given a higher raise or offered promotions because of his dedication maybe that would encourage Bob to do the same.  Penalizing someone for productivity only encourages people to slack off and this is exactly what "spreading the wealth" does. 

You brought it up.  I never mentioned it.  It seems that now the CYAs are trying to explain away things that sound like marx, without anyone asking them too.  I see a lot of guilt in your response.  Perhaps even you think he is just a tad too "Comradish" for your tastes (but admittedly you like him better than bush).

Be careful what you wish for - you just might get it (or have got it - your bed - you lie in it).

Productivity is not measured by hypeactive brownies who try to kiss up to the boss so the rest of us do our work competently. You'd be one of those guys who would not sign on to the 40 hour work week law to put an end to sixty-seventy hours.    

Stop with the earners non-earners stuff. EARNED income is from work; unearned income is from savings [no work] or excess from decent living wages that can generate a cushion to save. Face up to the real guilt of a nation that doesn't respect nor reward hard working people who are too often left substandard lifestyle. And the crap we hear so much on this site that these people never had it so good contrasted to underdeveloped countries doesn't hold water because we're better than that. 

Substandard?  WHat are they lacking?  A mercedes benz?  WHo me the Lacking.

First, No one, least of all Obama is talking about taxing Savings (he is not that stupid).  SO your point is half over.  And the other one is simply class warfare.  WHO decides what is excess?  That "poor" guy has a standard, not substandard of living.

Cushion for savings?  My how we forget.  You dont need a color TV.  Save that money.  But wait!  They spent it!  Just like I did.  WHen I was young and starting out.  But as I got older, my income went up, and I started saving (it helped as my children grew up and left too).  Are you going to DICTATE that they save?  You have to in order for your rant to work.  After all, we have seen what they do when they have money to save - they spend it.  Not on necessities. But on creature comfort (or waste).

So what is next?  A tax on you that goes into a government savings account?  Sorry to tell you that, but we already have it.  And the ROR?  0%.  It is called Social Security.  You know the Ponzi scheme?

Face it, you want the economy to be fixed?  INvest.  And who is going to invest?  The rich.  The poor wont.  They will waste it on extravagances (dont beleive me?  Check out the Sirloins that are bought with food stamps - check out the lottery winners).  I eat chicken a lot.  And save some too.  I rarely eat steak.

If you want "stagflation", go ahead and give that poor man a bunch of money.  He will spend it.  On what we dont know since there will be no entrepreneurs to create thigns to buy.  But that wont stop them.  It has not yet.  And of course he wont have money to buy more - there will be no jobs. The poor do not create jobs - investment does.  And if you are thinking that "Wait!  The government can invest with the tax money".  That has been done.  It was called the USSR.  Worked well, didn't it?

Yea, and people yell when we call Obama a socialist?  My god!  If he takes your advice, we will be wrong.  He will be a communist.

This discussion is not worth a blown artery. We'll never agree: you're a true political Darwinian and I believe governance includes giving a helping hand. 

Savings interest is all ready taxed (if you're honest an report it on your taxes). JFK gave us that "benefit" before departing. He was also the first to tap into Social Security (to fund Vietnam War). I think Ben Franklin should be placed back on the half dollar. He said a penny saved is a penny earn, not a penny saved is taxed by the gov. When ever something is started, good intentions aside, it never seems to stop. We need to resist the desire to create problems in the future for the sake of expedience today.

I believe that is my Christian duty, not a coerced one.

There is a big difference between a hand up (giving someone temporary help when they fall on hard times) and a hand out (giving someone something for nothing for an extended period of time), "spreading the wealth" is a hand out.