Aren't they both sort of right? Yes wealth can be created (for example we figure out that mineral x can be used for fuel, ect), but at the same time isn't there a finite amount of Earth's resources from which wealth can be derived?
No, it isn't right at all. Value is created based on intellect.
Okay, what do I mean? When you speak of resources, very few are actually finite. During the 1960's, the barely sentient left went on an attack against wood products. Trees they argued, were a finite resource and the evil, rich Americans were "cutting down the rain forests" to make paper. As with most of what the left claims, and everything environmentalists claim, there was no truth at all to the claim. Trees are a plant and an extremely renewable resource. Not only do we not cut down Brazilian rain forests for wood pulp to make paper, those trees don't make particularly good paper. You don't hear this bullshit much anymore, because the paper industry has spent billions educating people and done a reasonably good job. Most people understand that the paper they use is from trees grown on farms that reach maturity in two years. So it is with most resources.
We use more paper than any time in history, yet the supply of trees is greater than ever. Why? Because real value is the product a human intellect. Humans bred trees that grow very fast and produce superior pulp.
Wealth is created 100% of the time. Once created, it can be traded, bartered, stolen, looted, robbed, or earned. But before Obama can let the looters loose to raid the wealth of the nation, it must be created. Someone created a product or provided a service that others were willing to trade labor or resources in exchange for.