Work and Welfare

Altruist-collectivists’ schemes to redistribute “the wealth” sacrifice justice and reward sloth and indifference to reality. Socialism destroys economic freedom, destroys liberty, and ultimately enables the politicians to destroy the producers.

Wealth doesn’t just “exist.” Wealth is created. Individuals have an absolute right to the wealth they create. In a free, capitalist system individuals come to the market place to trade with other individuals, value for value. My paycheck represents real work, real value that I have created. I can not morally consume more than I produce.

Economies are driven by production. Production is the cause of wealth. It is production that makes consumption possible. One who produces nothing has nothing to trade, nothing to consume. What do these unproductive souls bring to the market place? 1. their tears [the moochers] to beg you to sacrifice the wealth you have created, or 2. their guns [the looters] to force you to hand over the wealth you have created. Looters and moochers offer nothing of value in exchange for your productivity. Looters steal you wealth by force; moochers count on your acceptance of the altruist code and “guilt you” into handing it over.

The vintage 1960s welfare state currently being sold to this nation as “change” by Barack Obama is actually a combination of the two: politicians will use the tools of the looter [force through the progressive tax code] to achieve the immoral goal of the moocher [to consume the values created by others].

Imagine the consequences of Obama’s immoral “spreading the wealth” principle applied to my high school American Government class. The just system in place today and always in my class is simple: students receive the grades they have earned. If I were to introduce the “change” endorsed by Obama after my next test, I’d tell my students that I’m going to add up all of the points everybody made and divide them evenly among all students. Students who slept in class, failed to study, made Ds and Fs will think this is a fine idea. They’ll be getting something of value for nothing. I’m the government in my classroom, so of course I can force the A and B students to hand over the points. I will argue that this is the policy of our likely, president-elect. They will grumble that my system is unjust, but I have the power to suspend them from school, so they’re not going to give me too much of a fight. They’ll get permits and protest a bit, here and there, but they’ll never attack me personally. I’ll get the school news paper to write a wonderful story about me and my “progressive” classroom, how I’m working hard every day to lift up the little guy. After a while the producers, the A and B students, will stop trying so hard to get ahead. What’s the point? As a result there will be fewer points to go around. The D and F students will demand more. They believe they are entitled to it...Good grades are my RIGHT! There are more of them than A, B, students by this time...I’ve done the math...There are fewer points to go around, less wealth to be spread. I’ll try to persuade my former A and B students to work harder “for the greater good,” for the “mother-school,” for their brother-men. Before long that empty promise will fail, too. [A producer’s right to keep the A he earned is the greater good. Justice is the greater good.] Eventually, I will have to crack down on the dissidents, start detaining my former A and B students, force them to study after school, set quotas based on their pre-experiment test scores. Finally, I will announce my Four Year Plan, force my change on the entire school of classrooms, and promise that if everybody does their DUTY to the STATE that all will be better for it on graduation day four years hence.

After graduation, our former A and B students will either:

>flee to some place on the globe where one can still keep the products of their labor;

>join their former oppressors, become card-carrying members of the collective elite, and take the club to the next generation of suckers...er...ah...brothers.