I can't imagine anyone ever saying anything like that. Are you suggesting that is what Obama is saying?

It seems you have a view/idea/description of "you" in the you didn't built that. Tell us about who that you is to you- I think I might mis-understand that. Do you think the "you" we are about to hear about deserves more or less credit than the BHO statement (ie did he go far enough for you or do you think his view is mild and moderate)? Thanks.

The "you" in Obama's statement referred to the successful business person. Here is what he said:I don't know how "mild" that comment is, but it is certainly moderate. The first sentence in his statement is the most important, IMHO. He is saying that successful people should take a long view. Their success, usually at least, depends in part on things that the community provides - roads, bridges, internet, banking, etc., etc. If they have any sense, successful people should understand that, and many do.

The only part of his statement that might cause some heartburn is the part I highlighted. I agree with what he says, but he should have worded it in a fashion that would make it harder for people to distort.

Frankly I'm not interested in more quotes from BHO- I'm interested in who your "you" is. When anyone says of a business or a completed lego structure (despite your objections the model completely fits) "you didn't build that" it implies someone else did. Who is that someone else? Use your words- not quotes which may or may not need clarification.

My "you" is the same as Obama's "you" - it's the successful business man. I'm not saying that the successful business person did not build the business, nor am I saying the little girl didn't build her Lego structure. I'm saying that she didn't build the highway on which the Lego set traveled to ultimately get to her.

I know you asked me not to use Obama's words, but I feel the need to correct something you said. If I read your message correctly, you are suggesting that Obama said that the business person did not build the business, which is not what he said. This is not a matter of interpretation. He just did not say that, at all.

"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.”

He did say that. There's the quote. He's speaking to the business person. Apparently you did not understand my question so let me rephrase it : If YOU didn't build that then who is the you(somebody else) that did? The you cannot be the business person- as he is the person who didn't build that- so who is the you(somebody else) which build the business? Who is the the somebody else?

That way I read his words, the phrase "you didn't build that," refers to "roads and bridges" in the previous sentence. Any other meaning seems absurd to me. Maybe he was being absurd. I doubt it.

I agree that successful people should and do take the long view. Let us say that we have a hypothetical person on this forum who has established their own business and spoon fed it for 20 years.........working 75 hour weeks with very little vacation time.

Say this business has grown to the point where it garners about $1M in total revenue and the gross profit in the business is about $400K per year. The net income for the owner is approx. $300K per year and the owner is gratefully forking over $100K per year in federal, state, and social security taxes.

Would this qualify as "giving back"?

If not, how much more money would you expect this individual to give?

And, how does this amount of money compare to the services that the individual receives for roads, education, etc.?


There is a pretty solid argument for not raising the marginal tax rate for those earning more than $250K and it is based upon how much these folks already "give back" to support the infrastructure that the President is referring to.

I stand to be corrected on this, but I believe Obama opposes a tax increase on that person. The $250K number has been raised under his proposals, if I am not mistaken.

I believe that his speech was given under the premise and the desire to support the increase in marginal rates for those earning over $250K. This obstacle is major for him due to the House refusing to go along with it.

If this is not his desire, can you explain the requirement to "give back"? Does he expect the businessman to stop by the White House and deposit a pile of cash on the front steps?

No, he proposes that the marginal rates be increased on high earners. The part that I thought he had changed was the definition of "high earner." He used to talk about $250K as the dividing line, but I thought he revised his proposal to set the line much higher than that. Under his concept, the business owner taking home $300K would see no change, AFAIK.