Re-Distribution of Wealth

I do not understand how something infinite can be "redistributed".  I wonder how a President of the United States can believe that increasing taxation on the economy will create growth in that economy.  I also wonder how taking the wealth of the successful by the state will improve the people as a whole.

I ask these things because if we look at history and we see that when the state confiscates the tools of enterprise, the population begins to experience the effects of poverty in a short amount of time.  Of course, the elites of these states will not suffer any adverse effects of these confiscations due to their status in the state.  Examples are numerous, North Korea, the old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and numerous other states.  Interesting is that with the economic changes in China, that when the forced confiscation of the tools of enterprise was abandoned, the wealth of the society increased.  China has embraced the key tenets of the market economy and you see many people leave the throes of poverty.

Barack Obama, the current President of the United States has proposed the "Buffett Rule" in terms of taxation. The rule demands that people earning over $1 million dollars on an annual basis must pay a minimum of 30% of that income in taxes no matter the source of that income.  President Obama states this will reduce the deficit and make the successful pay their fair share.  The majority of people that earn over $1 million dollars create jobs through their economic activity.  President Obama has never created a job, excuse me he did when wrote his books and they were sold.  Yet, he has never really worked in the private sector for any great period of time like his Republican opponent.  Mitt Romney worked for many years at Bain Capital which saved a number of companies that eventually created thousands of jobs.  Sure, in some of their enterprises jobs were eliminated but Bain Capital had a net creation of jobs.  These jobs in the private sector created wealth, jobs in the public sector do not create wealth in a market economy.  The public sector has its place in a market economy as many necessary services such as public safety and national defense which are performed in the USA at a high professional level for the most part.

The re-election of Barack Obama coupled with a return of liberal majorities in the houses of Congress will in four years create an agrarian subsistence society in the United States.  I might be a little dramatic at this point, but this President has led the efforts to having trillion dollar deficits and a massive increase in the US national debt that will reach a point where it will never be repaid.

The solution is the election of Mitt Romney coupled a Tea Party influenced Congress that will cut spending on worthless programs, rationalize government revenue that will reduce the deficits and reduce the debt level of the US government.  Libertarian thoughts about the true purpose of the role of government need to be implemented in order to reduce the role of government.

Another thing, Ronald Reagan led the efforts to eliminate crazy deductions in order to reduce the income tax rates to something more reasonable.  Remember, we had a top rate of 90% in the past and an even more complicated tax code than we do today.  Further simplification of the tax code will lead to lower rates and better rationalization of revenue needed to meet the obligations of the Federal Government as stated in the Constitution.  Ronald Reagan was not a wide eyed socialist like President Obama likes to say, Ronald Reagan believed that the solution to problems was not the government but through individual efforts you get solutions.

Re-distribution of wealth as stated by President Obama will do nothing more than create more poverty, greater unemployment and social unrest.  If we are given the opportunity to create more wealth and if more people get involved in wealth creation, the wealth will be distributed for all to reap the benefits.