Who Says Wealth Redistribution Doesn’t Work? The Government, That’s Who.

American progressives, those way left of center statist like Obama, are forever pushing the Marxisy meme of the need to redistribute the wealth from those that produce it to those that didn’t produce it. Their goal, of course, is to bring about a utopia of equality of results.

Our Marxist president once said, long before he was president, that Supreme Court judges had not done enough to bring about wealth redistribution. This same Marxist president has said that at some point, the rich have earned enough and they need to give some of their wealth back. Back to whom? Whom, we later learn are those that provided the roads and bridges and police forces and fire protection services that made it possible for those that built businesses to build them. Our Marxist president has become famous for the words: “If you got a business, you didn’t build that. Someone else made that happen.” He was referring to the roads and bridges, and etc. What our Marxist president doesn’t tell the people is who did pay for those things. If he were pressed, he would have to admit that all taxes that governments use to provide services like roads and bridges and police and fire protection come from the only generators of wealth; businesses. They pay taxes and their employees pay taxes, without which, governments would have no funds to provide any services or to pay their employees. Wealth redistribution does not make society as a whole better off. It reduces future wealth creation from what otherwise would be.

Nothing that I said above is new to you. We conservatives have reported these truths to anyone who would listen for a very long time. Yet, our politicians, like our Marxist president, pretend they don’t know basic economics 101. But, they are lying. Their own number crunchers know that redistributing the wealth does not, for example, reduce poverty. Ten days ago I came across this revealing article that quoted  from an Adam Smith Institute  (ASI) article, which I found  at Motor City Times.  This is the full quote that Steve at Motor City Times used:

Now, I think it should be obvious to everyone that giving poor people a means to purchase food means that poor people are less poor. We would also assume that some who were poor before this distribution are not poor after it.

But here’s the interesting question. Fully 0.5% of GDP is being given to the poor in just this one redistribution programme. What difference does this make to the number of poor in the US?

The answer is, distressingly, absolutely not one iota. By the official statistics this redistribution does not lift one solitary person up out of poverty: in fact, does not even alleviate poverty in any way recorded by the official statistics. Further, this is true of all of the major US poverty alleviation programmes. Their Section 8 housing vouchers (roughly, housing benefit), Medicaid (health care for the poor), the EITC (working tax credits). Adding these together the US spends a good 4% or more of GDP on poverty alleviation. Yet apparently it alleviates no poverty at all.

So, dear readers, it is not that our Marxist president and his friends don’t know the truth. It is that they chose to ignore the truth that their own number crunchers give them. What the uninformed voters need to know is that their Marxist president does not care one iota about the poor. He and his ilk are only interested in making more people dependent on government and, there by, consolidate their power over all Americans.

Well, now you know what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

19 thoughts on “Who Says Wealth Redistribution Doesn’t Work? The Government, That’s Who.

  1. The reason I like Austrian School economics is because it is grounded in human nature and reality.

    Progressivism is founded upon a denial of human nature.

    Trite old timeworn phrases are old and timeworn because they are true: Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he feeds himself and his family for a lifetime, gaining independence.

    Sometimes, it really is that simple.

  2. It’s the fatal flaw of self-government: People want “free” stuff. They will vote for the politician who promises the most “free” stuff. Never mind that nothing is free and someone has to pay for it.

  3. The truth can be very painful. That is why the Media is going non stop over Romney’s comment about those who prefer to live off the fruit of other’s labor.

  4. It seems that the progressive faith has some different doctrines. Citizens support wealth redistribution for equality. Politicians for job security. Obama finds it attractive to support his anti-Colonialist view indoctrinated to him through his father. His autobiography was even entitled “Dreams from My Father”. Obama has shown himself repeatedly and consistently as a reflection of his early influences. It’s why he detests American exceptionialism and sees wealth redistribution as a form of reparations for our imperialistic past. The progressives really do have a big tent.

  5. Once again, Kurt nails it.

    I follow a simple principal; that all behavior is goal directed. If someone continues to do something, and gets the same result, it can be assumed that this was the goal. If welfare programs don’t stop poverty, and even create more, and it persists for decades, can we not say that this is then intent?

  6. I don’t know if I have said it before, but we have rental property, which means we do normal rentals AND we do Section 8 rentals. There is a world of difference between the 2 and the renters we have. Section 8 will not allow so much as a crack in the wall, ripped screens, stained carpet, well….I wonder if MY house would pass inspection! The problem is that most those things happen because of the renters, but we have to fix them at our cost. Have you ever tried to get red koolaid out of carpet? Doesn’t work. It has to be replaced, our cost, just to happen again. Windows are supposed to be new with screens, but the screens don’t last long…again, we replace. What I see are new cellphones (better than I have), big screen tv’s, acrylic nails, alot of gold jewelry, internet, Link cards (food stamps), and a whole gammet of of other “free” things, along with school paid for, medical, I wonder I WE would be better off not working and going on the dole? The water/sewer bill can be walked away from and the landlord has to pay it, here in this town, so the renters know how to scam it. Then the other rentals, people are working and trying to make their payments, struggling, but at least working. We also have some that stop paying and after going thru the process of eviction after trying to get the rent and court dates, usually they will rule in our favor, but have you ever tried to get the money? You finally turn it over to a collection agency and you might get 50%, if they can recover any of it. The renters move on to the next unsuspecting landlord, we hope we find out thru the court system before WE are that landlord. What I am saying is that between all the benefits, we have a society of generation after generation, that if Mama was on welfare and section 8, at least here in Illinois, the kids can go on it, they don’t have to try and work. They are even proud because they can “get out on their own”, at OUR expense, of course. Do you see anything wrong with this picture? This is what Obama wants us all to become. I resent the hell out of this system.

    1. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by what you have said; but I am. It is much worse than when I was still living in the States. I owned some rental property back in the 70¡s. I had problems with renents, but nothing like you are describing. And, as always, givernment (not a misspelling)policies just make things worse.

      1. We had rentals back when we were in our 30’s (70’s-80’s) as well, this is a whole new ballgame, now. I sometimes wonder if it is worth the pain in the rear that it is. You get good tenants and bad ones, guess you tend to remember the bad ones. The whole system is set up now to benefit the tenants. We have taken to making sure we have pics on the day the tenants move in (dated), otherwise some will try and set you up with something called “breach of contract of habitibility”, in other words to say the place is uninhabitable and that is WHY they are not paying the rent. Without pics to prove the condition, the judge is liable to give them credit for living in a “slum”. You live and learn and then you cover your butt. Is it any wonder that getting some self respect by getting a paying job is at the bottom of the list? Not when you can get subsidized for power, given a cell phone if you need one and your kids are guaranteed free breakfast and lunch?? I mean, when my kids were little, we made sure they ate, now it is up to the state to make sure of that? What are parents for anymore? At what point, do they give up the raising of their kids to the government? Giverment is a good word for what is going on, Jim!!!!

  7. Let’s see if I get this right. Obama is the smartest guy in the room because, well I don’t remember why. Smart people don’t subscribe to Marxism. It’s dumb and historically refuted. So, here we have an Ivy League educated lawyer as President and he doesn’t understand economics or anything with numbers attached. That hints at a political brainwashing. Just think, a young, bright eyed black kid from the beaches in Hawaii comes to the big city to attend the white man’s school. He must have been an easy mark for the commie professors.

    Those professorial Marxist types at Princeton and Harvard are famous for teaching dumb stuff. There’s a White House full of their products. They collectively could not master first year algebra, never mind simple supply/demand economics. Oh, I forgot, they don’t want to. They were taught that the way to run the country is to kill the rich, bankrupt the banks and corporations, and invent as many victims as possible. That’s why the current Administration is not only the most inept administration in history, it is also the most racially motivated.

    They try to make it white against black, white against Hispanic, white against Native American. etc. Obama is all about dividing, and defining different groups in to victims. He is racist.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s