The forced redistribution of wealth is wrong. Excessively taxing a wealthy person and/or successful corporation because they are successful is unfair. And it is just as unfair if the same wealthy individual or corporation were to exercise their power and influence in a way to benefit themselves.
Of course it's interesting to note that only both wrongs can occur in the presence of a recognized government.
In a truly open market system void of government intrusion it would devolve to a "buyer beware" system. Truly useful, safe and enjoyable products would produce wealth and junk would produce bankruptcy.
I suppose liberalism is popular because we as a society only focus on the negative. It's easy to find stories about the guy that cheated his way to a billion dollars. It's easy to find a corporation that bought a Senator to benefit it's bottom line. People are lazy by nature and collectively we all look for ways to "work smarter, not harder". And, when taken to its logical conclusion, it's just another way of suggesting that anyone who is successful cheated. Liberalism looks at the worst in people. It assumes an unfair playing field is already in place. Or that you're incapable of success because you're black or you have a Southern accent or some other stupid manufactured reason. The presumption is that neither "smarter" nor "harder" work can produce success. Only lying and cheating.
Everyone has heard of Enron but did you know there was a story on CNN just last week about a man who worked at a $11/hour job for most of his life and when he died it was discovered he had millions. Who did he offend? What did he do wrong to qualify a higher tax bracket or punitive tax code? Oh, right... he was rich. What a terrible crime. Look how he manipulated the system. He had millions of dollars right under your noses... did you feel diminished when you saw him pushing his mop around your office? No. Do you feel diminished now knowing at night he was laughing at you while rolling around naked in his big stash of dollar bills? Yeah, he should pay... right? That bastard! How dare he work hard and save all those extra pennies! The nerve of that guy.
How can you say that a CEO is undeserving of his paycheck when you are not a CEO? How do you know when he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night? How do you know what he does all day long to make sure his company's product is competitive? What does it matter who he sleeps with or where he vacations?
I think it is pathetic that the very same liberals who would punish a wealthy person or corporation for their success feel completely justified in just handing over hundreds of millions of dollars to a "deserving" PowerBall winner. How moronic is that?
Sounds to me like someone might suffer from just a little envy.
Of course it's interesting to note that only both wrongs can occur in the presence of a recognized government.
In a truly open market system void of government intrusion it would devolve to a "buyer beware" system. Truly useful, safe and enjoyable products would produce wealth and junk would produce bankruptcy.
I suppose liberalism is popular because we as a society only focus on the negative. It's easy to find stories about the guy that cheated his way to a billion dollars. It's easy to find a corporation that bought a Senator to benefit it's bottom line. People are lazy by nature and collectively we all look for ways to "work smarter, not harder". And, when taken to its logical conclusion, it's just another way of suggesting that anyone who is successful cheated. Liberalism looks at the worst in people. It assumes an unfair playing field is already in place. Or that you're incapable of success because you're black or you have a Southern accent or some other stupid manufactured reason. The presumption is that neither "smarter" nor "harder" work can produce success. Only lying and cheating.
Everyone has heard of Enron but did you know there was a story on CNN just last week about a man who worked at a $11/hour job for most of his life and when he died it was discovered he had millions. Who did he offend? What did he do wrong to qualify a higher tax bracket or punitive tax code? Oh, right... he was rich. What a terrible crime. Look how he manipulated the system. He had millions of dollars right under your noses... did you feel diminished when you saw him pushing his mop around your office? No. Do you feel diminished now knowing at night he was laughing at you while rolling around naked in his big stash of dollar bills? Yeah, he should pay... right? That bastard! How dare he work hard and save all those extra pennies! The nerve of that guy.
How can you say that a CEO is undeserving of his paycheck when you are not a CEO? How do you know when he gets up in the morning and goes to bed at night? How do you know what he does all day long to make sure his company's product is competitive? What does it matter who he sleeps with or where he vacations?
I think it is pathetic that the very same liberals who would punish a wealthy person or corporation for their success feel completely justified in just handing over hundreds of millions of dollars to a "deserving" PowerBall winner. How moronic is that?
Sounds to me like someone might suffer from just a little envy.