In response to:

The Fallacy of Redistribution

LuckyLarue Wrote: Sep 20, 2012 1:43 PM
Well, yes, there is a difference. And if your argument is that you believe welfare for the poor isn't a good use of government taxes, then have the intellectual integrity to say so and stop pretending that wealth redistribution is an evil socialist concept instead of a method that has been employed by every government since government came into being. As for welfare for the poor, I happen to believe that the benefits far outweigh the abuses. Now, if you can figure out how we can stop the lazy good-for-nothings from abusing the system without taking away free school lunches, then I am behind you 100%, but I will fight you every step of the way if your "fair society" means deserving, needy citizens of my country must starve or go homeless.
The recently discovered tape on which Barack Obama said back in 1998 that he believes in redistribution is not really news. He said the same thing to Joe the Plumber four years ago. But the surfacing of this tape may serve a useful purpose if it gets people to thinking about what the consequences of redistribution are.

Those who talk glibly about redistribution often act as if people are just inert objects that can be placed here and there, like pieces on a chess board, to carry out some grand design. But if human beings have their own responses to government policies,...