Kids React to Redistribution of Wealth

One of Barack Obama’s mantras that he has been repeating ever since he first got into politics is the redistribution of wealth.  In its truest form, wealth in whatever form is taken from those who have it and given to those who don’t have.  But it rarely if ever works that way.

Those who push for it, like Obama, use the concept as a propaganda tool to win over the larger poor community with the promise of sharing the wealth of the rich with them.  They make the poor believe that they are entitled to part of the wealth earned by others and that the only qualification is that they are poor and remain poor.

If this sounds familiar, it is.  It’s America today.  And if you trace back through history, you will find that most, if not all of the social entitlement programs that exist today were instituted by progressive Democrats.  Welfare was first enacted by Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt and was expanded in the 1960s by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson.  Social Security was enacted in 1935 by Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt.  Medicaid and Medicare were enacted in 1965 by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Both Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B Johnson were well known for their progressive socialistic political views.  Roosevelt’s socialistic program of redistributing the wealth was known as the New Deal.  Johnson’s socialistic program of redistributing the wealth was known as the Great Society.

Obama’s socialistic program is known as Obamacare and Stimulus 1,2 and 3.  Don’t forget that under Obama, Medicaid coverage has been expanded to include more people.  Welfare has been expanded to include more people.

Sometimes it is difficult for adults to readily recognize the various forms of wealth redistribution, but kids grasp the concept almost immediately and they don’t like what they see.   Steven Crowder of Fox News set out to find out how kids react to redistribution of wealth in its purest form.  See the results for yourself.

Notice that it didn’t take kids long to see how unfair redistribution was.  Not only were the kids who earned their candy upset but so were some of the ones that had less and received more.  They weren’t fooled by the socialistic concept of redistribution of wealth and neither should we be fooled. We have a chance to prevent more of it from happening next Tuesday – so please vote!

Comments

comments

  • Doodlebug

    obummer is sooooo set on the redistribution of wealth - why doesn't he donate more to charitable organizations, they do a lot of good? He's always nosing around about Romney's wealth, obummer isn't exactly poor. He might be when he is out of the WH and Moochelle has to pay for her own vacations.

    • Screeminmeeme

      Doodlebug....Good question and good point. He's all too willing to give OUR money to whomever he deems is needful of it but he's loath to give his own.

      More of the do as I say and not as I do baloney.

      • hoot13

        Clearly he deems it important to redistribute our money to those who would sell our country out for 30 pieces of silver, obviously to by votes to remain in power, ( this is the democrat way )

      • tomo

        He used the word REVENGE assosociated with his re-election.

    • f8tul

      How do you think he is getting rich in the oval office? He is stealing our money

  • Screeminmeeme

    Now....if only the half of Americans who support Obama had the discernment of these kids.

  • Texas Tanker

    What ALL Americans fail to realize is that BHO thinks as a globalist. That mindset holds that every American is a 1%-er. This true because even those living in poverty in this country live as well as the middle-class in some European countries and far better than that compared to the third world. With that in mind, sharing/spreading the wealth takes on a whole new, frightening perspective. Notice that BHO, along with all the other Liberals/Progressives/Elitists don't want to share THEIR wealth.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NLORN6B3ZNGCAJTFHWWFUUEY4Q jong

    Of course Church were the ones who helped those in their communities before the government stuck there fingers in it. It was a short term project in that they were expected to get back on their feet. Of course the government has no desire to see people back working with the eternal welfare state.

  • pittymax

    There is hope after all!

  • Tom

    The only thing this proves is that kids are selfish! They must be taught the proper way to think! ; )
    Don't worry. Obama and his minions will teach these little munchkins their lessons in economics -- assuming the public is idiotic enough to reelect him.

  • Tom

    Lovely. what the heck did this website do to my text? The second sentence should have said, that should read indoctrinated.

  • http://www.facebook.com/joe.zimmerman.77 Joe Zimmerman

    Take the candy from the kid behind that tree but don't take mine ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

  • JennieWalsh

    This could be an effective way to get the kids to rise above their public school communist indoctrination (brain-washing) program which is the agenda of the National Education Association.

  • cmjay

    DEMOC RATS are only very generous with other people's money. Conservatives give more to CHARITY than Liberals..

    • capitalust

      They are incredibly generous with MY money! All taxation is THEFT.

  • tim evans

    Don't wealthy conservatives give to charity to take advantage of the tax breaks from such giving? Then they get those fantastic, baroque charity dinner spreads to feast on and feel like theyre really helping people out. I wish you guys would back up some your accusations. But i suppose it isnt necessary when preaching to the choir.Funny thing is, you're all probably middle class folk slated to get shafted by more trickle down, deregulation, and tax shelters.

    • Ruggedlark

      What a myopic view you have.

      First. Its not just wealthy conservatives that give to charity, its all conservatives-maybe not in the same amounts nor the same way. But, we all give.

      Secondly. The write off is not the first thing we think of when we give. However, if it helps our personal bottom line, why not take advantage of that?

      Third. Many times we conservatives and probably you libs also give, maybe its to the Salvation Army (I've taught my kids that we don't pass by the red bucket and not drop money in it), maybe its the "food for your county food bank" ticket in the check out at the grocery store, maybe its to a group of high schoolers that participate in a sport that isn't funded by the school district....There are lots of ways to give.

      But. We Conservatives are most certainly not giving just so we can get the flippen' write off-Like I could get a write off for the homeless guy I just bought soup and a sandwich for, and handed him a $10...Not.

      If you don't have compassion for a human being, you probably aren't meant to be walking this earth.

      • KarenWI

        I am a middle class 'self made (yes I BUILT MY LIFE!) conservative' and worked for state government 25 years. The few conservatives like me Consistantly gave more to others than the liberals.

        • Ruggedlark

          And Karen, I know you have. Its because you have compassion.

    • KarenWI

      My company announced 600 layoffs due to losing a government contract that we had for years and was awarded to a BLUE state company....hmmmm

  • tim evans

    And don't forget, globally, we're losing to socialist and communist countries by most metrics. Except in the hubris category.

    • Ruggedlark

      Tim, we are losing to these countries, because that is how our commander in chief wills it. He thinks we are no better than the rest of the world, and he is very focused on making the United States a Socialist, third world country.

  • Guest

    Poverty in the United States, circa 2012: heterosexual, married couple, early 30's, infant son. Husband's 12 year-old son a part-time (shared custody) resident in a 3-story, 2600 square foot house, built approximately 1920, refinished, not restored, with all modern bathrooms (3) and new kitchen. One-half acre lot, street-side and driveway parking; no garage; owned, not rented.

    2 cars less than four years old, bought new. New furnishings acquired during last three years. Big screen television, one of 4 televisions in house.

    Husband and wife work full-time jobs. Household income more than 50k per year.

    Under a Connecticut "family welfare" program, they get FREE medical insurance for the FAMILY, allowing the couple to cancel the $600.00 per month policy they had through their employers.

    Nice, eh?

  • progressiveandproud

    Comparing Halloween candy to the national economy is one of the dumbest anti-tax arguments I've seen yet.

    My God, people, have the concepts of patriotism and love of country completely disappeared in you people? If you want functioning country, taxes must be paid.

    • Skeptical_Boomer

      You poor progressive fools. You think you are helping people when all you are doing is enslaving them in dependency.Benjamin Franklin said it very well and I quote him here:

      "I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I
      think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in
      poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and
      I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for
      the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer.
      And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for
      themselves, and became richer."

      • progressiveandproud

        I don't know anyone who supports "giving" anything to the poor. The people I know and respect realize that to help the poor and middle class, there are times the government needs to step up to the plate and provide a means out of poverty.
        Those means are: (A) provide a national works program to rebuild our infrastructure. Every reputable source decries the condition of our national infrastructure and says we need to rebuild/repair most of it. (B) provide free birth control so women can plan their children and their lives. Studies are conclusive that access to birth control is a major tool against poverty. (C) Provide public education with adequate funding as was done during the '50s & '60s before politics took control.
        Contrary to the fairy tale conservatives believe in, most people on welfare don't want to be there. Provide them with viable opportunities and you might be surprised who quickly they break those chains.

        • Skeptical_Boomer

          A. What data do you have that the poor are qualified to hold jobs rebuilding infrastructure and I think you just might get a little pushback from the unions.
          B. Birth control is readily available and cheap. Too many simply refuse to use it. In too many states, more children=bigger check. Birth control can be had at no cost. It's called keeping your pants on.
          C. We spend more money per student than most countries that produce better educated students than we do. Our public schools spend too much time and money brainwashing another generation of children to be good little progressives. I hear this same song every election cycle about more investment in education and test scores continue to drop. How much is enough? No liberal will ever answer that question. We just need to spend more money. More money for education=more money for teacher's = more money for teacher's unions=more money for the Democrat Party=more money for education and the corrupt cycle continues. The kids are screwed. I live in Illinois where this corruptocracy has bankrupted our state just like every other city and state under one party Democrat rule.

    • capitalust

      The constitution provides for a HEAD TAX. That means everyone paying the SAME AMOUNT. Not the same rate (that is a FLAT RATE tax, where the more you make, the more you pay), and definitely not a PROGRESSIVE TAX (that is one where the more you make, the higher PERCENTAGE of your income you pay - straight out of the Communist Manifesto - Marx said that was the surest way to destroy capitalism). Get your head out of your anus, dude.

      • progressiveandproud

        Wow! Thanks for the definition dude, I never would have guessed.

        You write as a total boob. I'm sure you are an "unregistered" capitalist (whatever that means). Living in moms basement doesn't leave generate much desire to actually become informed and productive.

    • Ruggedlark

      I think you missed the point completely. The candy scenario illustrates for us all, including children, what "redistribution" is.

      A functioning country is run by people who earn money and pay taxes. But, not including people who worked, and are retired...Would you say that all able bodied people ARE working, and ARE they paying taxes?

      I think not.

      • progressiveandproud

        Of course all able bodied are not working. There is a shortage of employment opportunities and people can't find work.
        Nonetheless, paying taxes is necessary for a functioning society and this idea that the rich are being taxed unfairly while others slide is just silly.

        • Ruggedlark

          Why, do you think there is a "shortage of employment opportunities"?

          I have my own answer, but, I'd like to see what you think.

          Taxes are necessary-for law enforcement, fire, emergency personnel, city government, and city and county public works. Since they pay for schools, yes. But, I can see that if the poor-the people on welfare, on government assistance-as it was reported earlier this week, are receiving benefits to the tune of $61,000 a year-well. Why are they still poor?

          $61 grand is middle class.

          I'm going to disagree with you about the rich being taxed unfairly. Our tax code is a "progressive" code, with massive amounts of loopholes. And, the people in high places (like Washington D.C.) have "sculpted" it out this way. For themselves. For their friends. And, you know. When a person does finally become rich, through hard work and sacrifice (and you DON"T know what that person went through to achieve what they have), why should investment income-be taxed again, at the same rate as when the money was earned the first time? Why?

  • capitalust

    The only problem with the candy video is the guy should have been wearing an Obama mask. THAT would have made the point very strongly to those kids.

  • fcsuszka

    In light of this video, I hope the adults watching will realize that this is what will happen to them. Whatever you worked for will be taken away and given to someone who hasn’t worked. Take from the rich and give to the poor? LOL Sure why not. Pretty soon you will have a whole nation who doesn’t want to work and if they don’t work there won’t be any
    taxes and the rich? They will move off shore and laugh at the silly antics of our present administration as they try to spend us out of debt. Obama, you’re a horses patootie.

  • http://twitter.com/DustyFae StarDust Dolittle

    Well, obama is making us all equally poor. This is American's kids, let keep them this honest.Got to love them,