Are Barack Obama's ideas more so socialist, or a true definition of how a democracy should operate?

If the majority feel that the rich should be taxed more than they are, isn't it more of a matter of majority rules than socialist. Besides that, the super wealthy as is do not pay as much in taxes as do the middle and lower class because they write off excursions to luxurious resorts as tax deductions. I certainly think it is time the rich pay their share. Are Barack Obama's ideas more so socialist, or a true definition of how a democracy should operate?
YES now you're getting it. It is the majority that makes us a great nation, not the top 5%. We need to stand up for the working and middle class the most.Are Barack Obama's ideas more so socialist, or a true definition of how a democracy should operate?
My Marxist econ. teacher said the USSR would out last the capitalist system. He said the mathematical equations even proved it. Granted he only had a PH'd in the subject. Did the USSR give their citizens a better life styly?

Report Abuse

A question worthy to ask Obama: Having known so many entitled individuals, do they appreciate their benefactor(s)?





2nd question who do they see as their benefactor you, the government, or the tax payers?





Granted whom ever asked these questions would be more notorious than Joe the plumber.

Report Abuse

You need to come to reality, the rich will never pay their fair share. The rich own businesses and corporations. When any tax is placed on business or corporations, this amount is just passed along to the consumer in the price of the goods or services.





When we tax business and corporations, we are actually taxings everyone including the poor.





The best system for taxation is the ';Fair Tax';, a consumption tax. This is the only tax system that will lower taxes to all and place a cap on government run away spending.





The only hope for the ';Fair Tax'; is Governor Huckabee. Huckabee is just what this country needs to straiten out all the corruption with both Democrats and Republicans.





McCain is the lessor of two evils. If Obama gets elected, watch out for high inflation, high unemployment, and no growth. Watch out for Stagflation.
The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy and McCain's support for extending them ARE wealth redistribution.





And they didn't work, as evidenced by climbing unemployment and job losses. Let's try giving it to the people who earn LESS than $250K.





Here's a simple fact: a progressive tax system is, by definition, income redistribution. Neither candidate is supporting a flat tax rate. Good thing, too.





This ';socialism'; argument is a paper tiger; nothing there.
I suppose myself and others could try to educate you about economics, but it would be a waste of time. We are going to become more socialist and we are going to be poorer for it. The only thing any of us can do now is adjust for that reality. When those higher taxes translate into higher prices and lower wages, how do you plan to adjust?
Part of American dream is that unlike in socialist countries we encourage people to get rich, get that new house, a new car. Success pays and it's a part of American dream. In Soviet Union a scientist got approximately the same paycheck as a factory worker. That's how socialism works. They don't reward success, they reward the lazy.
Look up the definition of Socialism, and you will know the answer. But the conservatives don't want to realize that the US already has socialist elements in the government, and has been based on some as well. But they don't want you to know that (or don't know it themselves). . .
1% of the population controls 33% of the nations wealth. 80% of the population controls 15% of the wealth. I don't care what you call it; it's high time to change this fundamentally unfair situation. There's no excuse for some men not knowing how many houses they own while so many millions of hard working Americans can't even afford to get sick because they have no health insurance.
If Barack Obama would apply for a job with the FBI or with the Secret Service,


he would be disqualified because of his past association with William Ayers,


a known terrorist.





If he is elected President he would not qualify to be his own body guard! (because secret service protects presidents)how in the hell is he even qualified to be a candidate for the presidency.


but, americans are DEFINETELY dumb enough to vote for this guy
Yes. the rich should pay more because they have more to give. i think that his ideas are a mixture. they show how a democracy should operate in a time of crisis, which we are in, and so they lean toward socialist, which, if you remember, is how we pulled out of the great depression.
No it's not the way of democracy. Nowhere did it say in the beginning everyone was entitled to what everyone else had. It did state we were all equal %26amp; this was meant to mean: ';Put the remote down or get off your X-box %26amp; become a contributing member of this country - NOT a parasite.';
When it is too capitalist, you get economic collapse like the one that needs bail out and it becomes socialist.


So, Obama is at the middle of it. Not for socialism but not for extreme capitalism.
One could look at the American Revolution %26amp; the French Revolution then ask why one worked while the other didn't. One offered Liberty while the other tried for Equality. It is in the nuances.





Opportunity vs Outcome
Socialist! Check this out! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVgAi4-Lg鈥?/a>
socialist. a democracy depends on capitalism
a true definition of how a democracy should operate