Posts


She concludes with this question:

What’s wrong with soaking the rich for their fair share of tax revenue when they have all made their fortunes on the backs of the working poor?

[facepalm]

I'm afraid Ms. Altenhofen is beyond hope. Nevertheless, there are many others who may well be saved from such ignorance. For those that can still be saved, keep citing F. A. Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Thomas Jefferson, Frederic Bastiat and others. Cite those who, unlike the hopeless Ms. Altenhofen, understand it is the government that decides what is a "fair share" and uses guns to extract it; that without the "rich" there would be no job jobs for the "working poor;" that taking money from one group to give to another is not "compassion;" and that wanting to keep one's own money earned from voluntary exchange is not "greed."

Facepalm of the day.

Susan Altenhofen, of Fort Collins, had her letter to the editor published in today’s Denver Post. (“Blaming the victims for economic woes.“)
She concludes with this question:

What’s wrong with soaking the rich for their fair share of tax revenue when they have all made their fortunes on the backs of the working poor?

[facepalm]
I’m afraid Ms. Altenhofen is beyond hope. Nevertheless, there are many others who may well be saved from such ignorance. For those that can still be saved, keep citing F. A. Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Thomas Jefferson, Frederic Bastiat and others. Cite those who, unlike the hopeless Ms. Altenhofen, understand it is the government that decides what is a “fair share” and uses guns to extract it; that without the “rich” there would be no job jobs for the “working poor;” that taking money from one group to give to another is not “compassion;” and that wanting to keep one’s own money earned from voluntary exchange is not “greed.”

Ergo, in her world, allowing people to keep what they have earned is the same thing as a government gift.

Oh, the arrogance of the “progressive” statist.

Senator Claire McCaskill, (D-MO), in discussing her opposition to extending tax cuts, says the GOP is just “going to pout if we don’t give more money to millionaires.” (See the New York Times article “Tax-Cut Debate turns to Millionaires.“)

This is the perfect example of how “progressive” statists have the world backwards. She has confused letting people KEEP their own money with the government GIVING them money. Her basic belief, therefore, is that the government owns all productivity, and only allows people to keep it out of the government’s benevolence.
Ergo, in her world, allowing people to keep what they have earned is the same thing as a government gift.
(I know, I know: to the “progressive” statist, rich people haven’t “earned” anything. They have exploited the labor of others or they have simply stolen wealth from the proletariat. Therefore, the benevolent hand of government is necessary to correct the injustice. That is a different discussion for a different day. I merely suggest that F.A. Hayek addresses that contention and soundly shows its error in his book “The Road to Serfdom.”)