Actually, the full quote - much longer - is this:
The full context reads beyond roads and bridges. My English teacher would argue that "you didn't build that" applies to "if you've got a business" if you parse the words in a non-political context. Partisans are going to parse it whichever way helps them win Internet argument contests. Either way, it was an unfortunate blunder that has stuck. Even if he was talking about infrastructure that is best served by a form of government, telling the small business owners who work very hard that infrastructure is more important than their blood, sweat, and tears usually won't gain their vote.
This whole quote from Obama, and how it was twisted, is the quickest and easiest instance of a much broader dynamic I see at work in the US (or at least, the portions of it I interact with a little or a lot). I've decided to call it "Diggs' 8th Habit for Highly Effective Politicians", a takeoff from Covey's 7 Habits. Among the first 7 Habits of Highly Effective people we have "seek first to understand, then to be understood" (Covey's 5th habit:
link).
The 8th habit, as constructed by me, is something like "Seek first to misunderstand, then go on the attack".
In the particular instance of what Obama was talking about, it has never been unclear to me the idea he was trying to express. He wasn't demeaning business owners or trying to say they were less than they are, or that business building is easy. It was always clear to me that he was saying that building a business (and it generalizes to a lot of other things) happens within an ecosystem. That ecosystem includes infrastructure (roads and bridges), which is what a lot of people fixate on. And that's clearly true, but it's also a lot broader than that.
That ecosystem also includes a system of law, both the letter of the law, as well as the softer edges around who, how, and when it gets enforced. Those things also contribute or detract from the building of a business. And of government, freedoms, educational opportunities and system, and on and on. I am absolutely of the belief that little things in the US - reasonably high compliance with traffic law, and reasonably low levels of corruption in government, are huge contributors to our economic system.
Heck - one of the things that makes the US stock markets so popular is the relative transparency of the companies in the markets. (I'm going with relative here - I know there are opportunities to be better). These are elements of the ecosystem in which business building occurs in. If any interaction with a government official needs a handful of cash to make it happen, that is a friction in the ecosystem that slows everything down and makes it harder to conduct business.
If compliance with traffic laws is minimal or nonexistent, overall traffic flow is much slower, there are more expenses associated with the mayhem that results. You will also need more and bigger roads so that you can have more cars not moving on them. Lack of compliance with traffic laws adds friction to society and makes it less efficient to conduct business. It's all part of the ecosystem in which we live, and it all contributes to the environment in which a business is built.
In the extreme, you could even say that the customers of the business helped build the business - unless we think any business owner is so amazingly good that they can build up a business without customers. And of course, overemphasizing this point also leads us somewhere ridiculous and not intended by anybody.
For me, the idea of Covey's 5th Habit ("seek first to understand, and then to be understood") is easy enough - it's just awfully hard to implement in practice. I figure that to do it well, I need to understand what somebody is trying to convey from their point of view - what is the truth, the nugget, that they are trying to express through the haze of the imperfect words that they are using? I need to understand it the way they understand it, whether I agree with the point or not. And the words are always imperfect - the language being used is imprecise, and the person using the imprecise language is human themselves, and that means they are bringing their imperfection to how they convey the idea, better or worse, at any particular moment. So I'll invariably have clarifying questions to make sure I'm understanding the idea.
It takes work on the part of the listener (reader) to understand the intent of what's being communicated.
I grow increasingly worried that too much of the 8th Habit signals we've reached the peak, and have begun the decline of our society and civilization. I suppose in a selfish way I might be fortunate and have the serious decline wait long enough that I can die and not witness it. Whether we sort out AGW or not.
And on the off-chance this point is unclear - maybe due to the title of the thread - I don't see anybody in the political spectrum with a lock on the 8th Habit. I encounter people who's ideas I agree with and believe in, and it's equally apparent to me that they are applying the 8th Habit in their attempt to "persuade" people to their point of view. In fairness, I believe there are a small number of people applying the 8th Habit consciously - I think most of the time, it's happening unconsciously.
Another recent example that many people would have encountered in the Investor's section, were the proposals at the Shareholder meeting that Tesla move to all vegan interiors. My own impression from reading those threads, is that the individuals making the proposals weren't interested in understanding other points of view - they had a bat they wanted to swing, and any response (even responses in agreement with the central thesis that at least the option would be nice), were met with a swing of the bat.
I'll put the soapbox away now. I'm at a loss how to tie this back to the original question of the thread - I apologize for wandering off in the weeds
