- The Washington Times - Friday, February 11, 2011


The redistribution of wealth to achieve social justice is the objective of many in Congress. Common sense demands we ask who determines whose wealth requires redistributing, who will do the confiscating and who will do the equalizing.

The premise for this policy is unconstitutional and immoral. Indeed, the Declaration of Independence declares that human beings are “created equal … endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.” However, the Founding Fathers were cognizant of the nature of man and were not so presumptuous as to prescribe equal outcomes. All that is guaranteed are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Human nature dictates and reasonable persons of sound mind expect a variety of outcomes. Not all possess the skills and acumen of Bill Gates or Donald Trump. Is it compassionate and just to redistribute the latter’s wealth and punish them for their success? If the wealth of the world were distributed equally to every person in the world, within days there would again be rich and poor.

The appropriation and redistribution of other peoples’ money nurtures the entitlement mentality rather than the entrepreneurial instincts of man. Consider the following: A panhandler standing on a corner receives a dollar every day for a week from a beneficent donor on his way to work. One day the following week, the donor has no dollar bill to give to the man. As he passes by, the panhandler taps him on the shoulder and asks, “Where’s my dollar?”

Once a claim on property is permitted and sanctioned, however small and seemingly insignificant, the sanctity of private property has been abrogated and the amount to be confiscated will be determined by the mob in charge.


Flushing, N.Y.



Click to Read More

Click to Hide