Comments about ‘Romney, Obama, and 'redistribution:' How much do U.S. taxes reallocate wealth?’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Sept. 21 2012 10:11 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
What in Tucket?
Provo, UT

Prince Phillip once said, "we gave to the poor until we were all poor." That about sums it up. Redistribution of wealth is a fact of our lives, social security, medicare, medicaid, food stamps, welfare, etc. But it can become excessive and hurt the economy, plus weakens people's desire to work. I think a vote for Obama will exacerbate this.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

A Proclamation on the Economy
from the LDS 1st Presidency and Twelve

"The experience of mankind has shown that the people of communities and nations among whom wealth is the most equally distributed, enjoy the largest degree of liberty, [and] are the least exposed to tyranny and oppression…"
. . . . .
"One of the great evils with which our own nation is menaced at the present time is the wonderful growth of wealth in the hands of a comparatively few individuals. The very liberties for which our fathers contended so steadfastly and courageously, …, are endangered by the monstrous power which this accumulation of wealth gives to a few individuals and a few powerful corporations. … It threatens to give shape to the legislation, both State and National, of the entire country. If this evil should not be checked, and measures not be taken to prevent the continued enormous growth of riches among the class already rich, and the painful increase of destitution and want among the poor, the nation is liable to be overtaken by disaster; for, according to history, such a tendency among nations once powerful was the sure precursor of ruin."

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

I heard BO lying on NPR this morning. He said Romney said people WANT to be dependent on government. Yeah, Romney's words were ill-chosen, but BO goes beyond what Romney said and LIES about it. BO further lied saying he rallied the American public to pass Obamacare; opinion polls showed the majority opposed Obamacare when harry reid pushed it through by hook and by crook, and the dems party got lambasted in 2010 BECAUSE of Obamacare. But since when has the truth mattered to BO when election time came around?

LDS Lib,
that proclamation is NOT on the LDS web page - I believe you either made it up or it belongs to another time and another circumstance. Can you explain why the church itself and Brigham Young in particular held large ownership interests in companies, or why until only about 20 years ago Apostles sat on corporate boards? The church now has significant investment interests. So it appears to me you are trying to hang the church by its own rope.

Jeromeo
Salt Lake City, UT

This has to be the shortest hatchet job article I have ever seen. It asks a question and offers nothing else in return than a (one more time) fourteen year old feeble attempt at a counter punch to Mitt Romney's RECENT errs. (snippet from a CSM article) Mitt Romney was not addressing the redistribution of wealth, his position is simply elitist Let's not forget that the 47% are 1) also Americans, 2) non-the-less still pay all kinds of taxes, from sales to property... even gas taxes (when they can afford big oil company prices and 3) many find themselves in this position due to a downturned economic period which was wholly incepted during the previous Republican administration. So, DN... how much DO U.S. taxes realocate wealth? Where is your article on that?

P.S. DN. Why did you drop the link on the "Who receives more government aid: Democrats or Republicans?" article? Fact checkers got your tongue?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT
LDS Lib,
that proclamation is NOT on the LDS web page -

[neither are ANY of the LDS GeneralConference talks before 1971 - does that mean it was never said, or doesn't exist too?

That proclamation is official, and is JUST as pertanent to us today as it was then -- even more so.

Do some reading, BrighamYoung was a hardcore Socialist/Capitalist.

Saints arriving in the Valley were not all farmers, most were jobless and destitute, and there were no factories. BY despised businessmen who imported cheap items from the States. They made $, but No jobs.

As "Governor" Brigham created "Missions" to promote&create industires to provide jobs.
Items cost a little more, but the money STAYED here,
was evenly distributed and
wasn't sent outside of the Stateof Deseret.

Brigham also disliked banks.
Money stting in a bank by the welathy was money NOT stimulating the economy.



=================

Jeromeo

P.S. DN. Why did you drop the link on the "Who receives more government aid: Democrats or Republicans?" article? Fact checkers got your tongue?

12:28 p.m.
[Yes, It was by Joey Ferguson, and its nowhere to be found this morning.]

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

LDS Lib,

I ask again

Can you explain why the church itself and Brigham Young in particular held large ownership interests in companies, or why until only about 20 years ago Apostles sat on corporate boards? The church now has significant investment interests. So it appears to me you are trying to hang the church by its own rope.

I guess by your definition the church is evil for having any wealth at all.

the money stayed here and was evenly distributed? Really? I guess that's why BY was wealthy and many people lived in dugout shelters, because it was "evenly" distributed.

BTW, there was NEVER a State of Deseret.

I guess BY would condemn those Apostles who sat on the board at Zions Bank - I guess he would also condemn the church for owning it for awhile.

do some reading - you would see that you cannot be socialist and capitalist at the same time.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Wealth has been redistributed to Obama vacations, golfing, and fueling Air Force One for campaign trips.

Obama spent more money on one vacation then Romney made in one year.

So! Who really is out of touch?

worf
Mcallen, TX

Can you imagine a teacher redistributing points from honor roll students to the others?

No respect for accomplishment.---Irresponsible, and unpatriotic.

the truth
Holladay, UT

@LDS Liberal

IS the wealth spread by personal choice, personal agency, individual charity (IE the spirit of Zion, and of God),

or by government force (the spirit of liberalism, and the far left and the adversary)?

You neglected to mention.

worf
Mcallen, TX

the truth,

Liberals don't understand the concept of personal agency, or individual charity.

What they do understand are regulations, and mandates. To oppose regulations, and mandates would equal to being uncaring, rich, and greedy.

For example. Serving an LDS mission, is a personal choice, rather than a mandate.

I'll take choice any day.--

worf
Mcallen, TX

LDS Liberal,

Redistribution of wealth means we all equally share in poverty. Dependent, and begging government for substances.

Quagthistle
Utica, KS

It always discourages me to see people arguing over the scraps we throw to the poor and ignoring the hundreds of billions in tax subsidies we give to companies like Exxon. I sure wouldn't want Exxon's CEO to go hungry or homeless. This is one of the things I don't understand. Why is it that we "grind the faces of the poor" instead of looking at the fat cats who act like black holes of money.

I also don't understand why political articles in DN always seem so biased toward the Republican point of view. The Church is politically neutral (they've said so many times), and there are faithful LDS on both sides of the isle. I'm a faithful LDS member, and I lean toward the Democrats (they may support gay marriage, which I oppose, but at least they don't conspire to rob the poor working class to fatten the rich or try to disenfranchise 47% of the country, most of whom pay payroll taxes but simply don't earn enough for income tax).

When we, as a people, all share and work together, everyone wins. See 4 Nephi 1:3.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments