I'm not sure if I would call sugar subsidies socialism (these subsidies have been decried by conservatives and libertarians), but it does represent the redistribution of wealth and it surely goes against free market principles. But where socialism seeks to create a more equal distribution of wealth, these subsidies concentrate wealth into the hands of a few Florida growers. Mr. Will's example does, however, exemplify why the American people are fleeing the Conservative mantra of "what's good for corporate America is good for the people" and the trickle down economics of tax cuts for the wealthy and lax regulation.

Americans are still waiting for the prosperity to trickle down. Or, rather, they've given up waiting. By examining the burnt out husk of our financial system it's become pretty apparent that corporate interests aren't just selfish interests, but they're also self-defeating. That is why there is a positive role for the state to play. In order to correct market failures, the government redistributes wealth in a way that is good for the collective whole, thereby making the country stronger.

Mr. Obama is seeking a more equal distribution of wealth. I think some conservatives need to stop and ask themselves why Mr. Obama - and based on the polls, a majority of the American people - think we need some sort of wealth redistribution. Instead of seeing it as "taking my money," they should realize that a more equitable America is a stronger America. America isn't strong when the personal savings rate is negative. America isn't strong when its people can't access health care. By changing the way our tax dollars flow, we can make America stronger.