What the con-man and the lib-man are wrong about this is that as the con-man doesn't get that no he doesn't live on an island with no society to help him (besides, a missing piece of this is that the guy paid into the system(s) that he is using; the government didn't give them to him for free), it doesn't mean that the government can take credit for what he does.
It would be a university taking credit for every student that graduates, because they have the infrastructure to facilitate the student to study and pass the classes. It still took the student doing the work to make it happen.
it doesn't mean that the government can take credit for what he does.
I think that's the big misunderstanding here. Government isn't taking credit. It's merely being pointed out that government and business have a symbiotic relationship, which is a counterpoint to the notion that a man is an island, so to speak.
If I say to you: "you didn't build that (that being anything from a business to a model car)," because there was a system in place to facilitate it being built, then who did? The implication is that since you didn't build it, then the government has the right to more of your rewards/profits/assets whatever because you are in essence stealing from the government the "fair" output of your results because you aren't sharing enough of them with the rest of us.
His words, in context, referred to infrastructure, not businesses. From the speech:
If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business -- you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.
The entire paragraph provides ample context. The sentence in question contains an mdash, showing he was starting one thought, then briefly paused and switched to another thought. It's no wonder politicians use teleprompters these days. Everything they say is parsed, so any free-form speaking with broken sentences, like this one, are ripped to shreds. It amazes me how people can read this and not see the actual meaning, though.
Everyone who pays taxes invests in those projects and reaps the rewards of said projects, even those who don't pay into them, but not everyone who pays taxes creates their own business or builds some new device.
And who is the somebody? The somebody would be taxpayers. The government isn't able to shower down fancy roads and infrastructure out of wishes, sunshine and farts. It takes money.
Again, not sure anyone is saying otherwise. The government fills in the gaps where the free market cannot. Mr. Gaster pays taxes, sure, but his tax contribution doesn't begin to make a dent in the infrastructure he benefits from. It requires our collective contribution in order to work.
I think you're still fixated on what the right wants Obama's words to mean versus what they actually meant.
I know it vital to your confirmation bias that he said "that" as "what you built", but its clear from the quote and the dangling phrase "roads and bridges" that he did not mean "a business"
Ok, well you didn't build those roads or bridges either, because I didn't see you with a hard hat on leaning on a shovel with five of your friends watching one guy do work.
I suppose that's a subjective question. Everyone has a different idea of how little or how much the government should do, and that determines (or should, anyways) how much taxes they should collect.
Who are the parasites? Is it the civil servants who are discouraged from politicking, or the billionaires who blatantly bankroll candidates to gain special treament, or the candidates that prostitute themselves to those donors?
A symbiotic relationship implies a voluntary relationship. I don't find the government/citizen relationship voluntary. So, I would say it's all parasitic.
No. A symbiotic relationship is often involuntary and routine.
I think I understand whence your perpetual misunderstanding of reality derives: you mix up connotative and denotative definitions routinely and intone them like they are the voice of God.
Hey, dumb-dumb... moral theories are limited to human discourse. Quit introducing biology to it like you know what you're talking about. And look up metaphor while you're at it.
I don't think anyone's saying that, I think they're saying though, what he has done wouldn't be possible without all the things we pay for as a society.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:07 pm (UTC)It would be a university taking credit for every student that graduates, because they have the infrastructure to facilitate the student to study and pass the classes. It still took the student doing the work to make it happen.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:16 pm (UTC)I think that's the big misunderstanding here. Government isn't taking credit. It's merely being pointed out that government and business have a symbiotic relationship, which is a counterpoint to the notion that a man is an island, so to speak.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 11:00 pm (UTC)And who is the somebody? The somebody would be taxpayers. The government isn't able to shower down fancy roads and infrastructure out of wishes, sunshine and farts. It takes money.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 11:36 pm (UTC)I think you're still fixated on what the right wants Obama's words to mean versus what they actually meant.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 03:24 pm (UTC)What does he think "build" means?
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 06:16 pm (UTC)What's your definition of "build"?
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 07:01 pm (UTC)Oooh oooh oooh and if there's no gravity, then everybody spins off into space! I love these hypotheticals!
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 08:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 12:39 am (UTC)I know it vital to your confirmation bias that he said "that" as "what you built", but its clear from the quote and the dangling phrase "roads and bridges" that he did not mean "a business"
Stop that obtusity.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 02:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 12:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 06:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-09 01:53 am (UTC)What's your point?
no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 04:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 09:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 05:31 pm (UTC)you are inferring a meaning that does not exist.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-09 01:57 am (UTC)I think I understand whence your perpetual misunderstanding of reality derives: you mix up connotative and denotative definitions routinely and intone them like they are the voice of God.
Therefore, you are a Dunning-Kruger case study.
no subject
Date: 2012-08-09 02:31 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-09 03:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 08:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-08-06 11:01 pm (UTC)