You can’t help anyone by making less money than
you could. The best thing you can do for poor folks
is not be one of them. Set an inspiring example for
anyone who might want to pay attention, but don’t
feel the least bit guilty about having a beautiful
home or many, even when the TV news shows you a
family living in a cardboard box beneath a bridge.
There are a lot of homes around just as beautiful
as yours for sale, and if the people living in the
box really wanted a home, they’d get jobs, save
money, start a business, and soon live somewhere
better, and eventually buy a beautiful home too.
You moving out of your home and into a box beneath
the bridge won’t help them.
Said that way, it’s pretty obvious, isn’t it?
Taking prosperity away from one person does not
automatically enrich another.
The entire ‘great society’ experiment has also
shown us that taking prosperity away from some and
giving it to others doesn’t accomplish anything of
lasting significance either. This is the theory of
liberalism; government as Robin Hood. But Robin
Hood was a thief. And he had a lot less overhead
than the government. The first flaw in government
redistribution of wealth schemes is there seems to
be very little of the wealth they confiscate that
makes it through their bureaucracies to actual
redistribution. The second flaw is that dependence
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий