The Empire Strikes Back: 1998 Obama Video: ZOMG REDISTRIBUTION!!!1111onesy

[Admiral Yi]

He added so?

[Razgovory]

He added so?

So?

[CountDeMoney]

Updated 11:29 p.m. — Mitt Romney's campaign this week has pounced on a 14-year-old clip of Obama speaking about "redistribution" in October 1998 at a conference in Chicago, in which the future president seems to extol the virtues of redistributing wealth.

Yet NBC News has obtained the entirety of the relevant remarks, which includes additional comments by Obama that weren't included in the video circulated by Republicans. That omission features additional words of praise for "competition" and the "marketplace" by the then-state senator.

"I think the trick is figuring out how do we structure government systems that pool resources and hence facilitate some redistribution because I actually believe in redistribution, at least at a certain level to make sure that everybody's got a shot. How do we pool resources at the same time as we decentralize delivery systems in ways that both foster competition, can work in the marketplace, and can foster innovation at the local level and can be tailored to particular communities."

Obama continues in a few words after that to describe the use of tax credits in setting public housing development policy in Chicago as an example before concluding.

The video circulated by Republicans, which has used as fodder for an attack on Obama, includes a longer reflection by Obama about talking about how government action can be effective. But the clip has been cut short after the word "shot;" Obama's words about competition, the marketplace and innovation are omitted from the clip.

[Tamas]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

What is worse, however, is tha the only present alternative to him is Romney, who appears to be an evil twisted mofo.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

They'll never find my coffee cans full of money buried all over the place

chances are you won't find them either :p

[katmai]

Wtf are you babbling about tamas.

[CountDeMoney]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

Then we'll be OK, since we're not going to have him do that.

[Josquius]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

That's completely the opposite of the way things are. Its OTT liberalism which has been shown to be very iffy thanks to the 2008 mess. Socialism is the future.

[Neil]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

That's completely the opposite of the way things are. Its OTT liberalism which has been shown to be very iffy thanks to the 2008 mess. Socialism is the future.

The problem with socialism these days is that we don't have societies.  Elements of socialism were the solution to the excesses of the economic system that built unprecedented prosperity, but it was made possible by the nation-state.  Since prosperity has eroded the nation-state, socialism has become an iffier prospect.

[Martinus]

I didn't watch the video, but my guess is it means something like this - have wealthy people pay a reasonable share of taxes to help fund (along with the taxes from the less wealthy) to provide a solid foundation for everyone to get their crack at the can. So, say, the kid of poor parents gets enough food that they don't suffer from malnutrition (and all the downstream results of that), that they get access to a decent enough education (that they couldn't afford if they had to pay for it themselves) that they have a chance to work hard and become well off themselves. Similarly, if someone's been working hard but larger economic trends leave them in a rough spot, say because their entire industry is outsourced or made redundant and their skills aren't transferable, there's enough of a support net to prevent them from losing the entire substance of their life immediately, and a process for getting them other skills so they can continue to work hard in a different industry.

I think that's what's meant by "a fair shot".

Yeah, I think this is a no-brainer. I don't know if the Yanks who claim they don't get it are just dumb (maybe noone gave them a fair shot at getting a decent IQ) or deliberately obtuse?

[Martinus]

I think he does have a clue, personally.  It seems like a standard defense of social democracy.

That's sort of my point.  Social Democracy is not about giving anybody a fair shot at anything, it's about providing the necessities of life.

Don't you really see the connection between the two? I mean, seriously. Are you unable to see it or is it just another Yi-style debate of "prove something obvious to me"?

[Martinus]

I think he does have a clue, personally.  It seems like a standard defense of social democracy.

That's sort of my point.  Social Democracy is not about giving anybody a fair shot at anything, it's about providing the necessities of life.

The two are related.  Once your necessities are met, you have a chance to act like a human being rather than an animal.

Pretty much. If you live below subsistence level, you have no chance of improving your conditions because your entire effort is spent on hand-to-mouth existence.

Incidentally, that's also why no successful revolution was started by the working class only.

[Martinus]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

What is worse, however, is tha the only present alternative to him is Romney, who appears to be an evil twisted mofo.

I said it before and I will say it again: your country failed not because it was run by social democrats, but because it was run by Hungarians.

Countries like Germany, Poland, or many in Scandinavia (the epitome of social democracy) are actually managing quite well right now, both in terms of their fiscal stability and their economies. The countries most hit by the crisis are either kleptocracies like Greece, or the free market gone wild countries like the UK.

[Malthus]

Social democracy isn't about the necessities of life, that sounds far more like a more right-wing idea, basically of the state as safety net. Any attempt at social democracy goes way beyond that.

Also this is stupid by Romney. McCain attacked Obama for similar remarks to no effect. Far worse is that attacking a guy who's been President for four years over something he said fifteen years ago looks weak and sort-of weird.

Yeah, as a reply shot to the Romney video gaffe this is the political equivalent of "yo momma!". 

[Tamas]

I tell you again what I keep telling you: Obama is a social democrat, and social democracies are in their final phases of dying out in Europe.
To have him switch the US into a welfare state when welfare states have been proved a bad idea would be catastrophic.

That's completely the opposite of the way things are. Its OTT liberalism which has been shown to be very iffy thanks to the 2008 mess. Socialism is the future.