It is disconcerting how casually we are willing to vote for and accept expropriation of property from the most successful among us, the so-called “1 percenters.”
We have stigmatized entrepreneurship and the term “individualist” as being something synonymous with sociopathy or selfishness. Admonitions such as “Be the best that you can be” and “The sky’s the limit” no longer apply, since incomes are capped and too much affluence and prosperity is now punished.
The flaw of this policy is the delusion that being either rich or poor is a fixed state. Social mobility is the process of people continually moving up and down on this scale. The gap is not a hierarchical order of authority, but an expansive playing field. Those at the top are expanding the reach of possibility, and if we limit and penalize their efforts, we shrink the playing field and nurture mediocrity.
Theft does not suddenly become moral when renamed “taxation” or described as a “fair share.”
We have grown up accepting this moral schism that says theft is OK when it is done officially. George Orwell, author of “1984,” observed, “Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
Americans have elected and are now governed by people obsessed with redistributing wealth and micromanaging our lives. It is inevitable that the government’s quixotic spending to effectuate equal outcomes for all must be funded by unconditional, unrestricted taxation. In other words, to each according to his needs and from each according to his ability.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
By Jay Sekulow
The left's outrage over the IRS turns to a plea to 'move on'