By Bill Augustine -
Last Friday, the 13th, President Obama, absent his teleprompter and off script, embarked on a diatribe against entrepreneurs and tax-paying job creators. His remarks reinforced a biased toward tax users over tax payers in previous remarks over his presidency - “the private sector is doing fine”.
The President’s message was that individuals shouldn’t take credit for gain derived from the community, he said:
‘…., you didn’t get there on your own. ….there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. …. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. Somebody else made that happen…”
This from the President who uses a personal pronoun copiously when promoting himself instead of crediting the community is hypocrisy. He recently used I or Me 117 times in a campaign speech in Ohio, every 13.09 seconds.
“Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business—you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."
Was “that” referring to the business or bridges? However you interpret this sentence the impetus of the entire statement is disparaging to job creators. How could such an articulate President cause such confusion? If people are misinterpreting what he meant, why hasn’t he clarified the statement?
Let’s assume that “that” did refer to bridges and accept the media rule -the left can lift phrases from context but the right cannot (think Romney’s-“I like to fire people”).
Who paid for the bridge? Did not job creators? Nearly half the population pays no income tax. The private sector paid a high price for the bridge (thank you government) because of work rule restrictions, environmental regulations, protections against that snail or that weed, union worker mandates, and other red tape discouraging many contractors from bidding on the project.
Using the “what about the bridges” argument and flipping it, how could federal employees be paid 20% more than private workers in the same occupation without the private sector financing the public sector? It takes 12.45 private sector workers to pay the salary of a federal employee, 9.53 for a state of local employee.
Without tax revenues generated by a private sector continually increasing productivity how could huge increases in per pupil education costs be sustained while ignoring school performance?
Nice try, but how many business owners would prefer no government, no bridges? No one is occupying the other chair in Obama’s straw man debate. Yes, the private sector needs the public sector. But make no mistake the parasitic public sector could not exist without the private sector paying the bills.
W.C. Augustine is the author of the book "Atlas Rising."