This is one of the 100 most powerful men in America, a United States Senator, bound by an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution", speaking about healthcare:
This Will Address Mal-Distribution of Income
The entire concept is mind-boggling. The bill was about healthcare supposedly, wasn't it? It was about sick people getting access, wasn't it? Where does it become redistribution of income?
Where in the Constitution do we find any language about individual income and the equalization thereof?
This is supposedly, or at least has been in the past, a nation of capitalism, entrepeneurship, individual achievement and opportunity for success. Nowhere is there anything in the government's mandate that deals with Robin Hood. If I am rich, it is through my own efforts. If I am poor then I have the opportunity to strive to become rich.
But nowhere does it give Sen. Baucus any authority to judge what is too rich.
There is no other word to describe what he claims than communistic.
How does he get elected from a state of hard-working frontier individualists like Montana?
2 comments:
How bout we start with Max' salary?
The appropriate response to any conceivable "mal-distribution" of wealth should be to place into the hands of the poor the means to generate their own wealth. That is, teach them to be skilled workers, professionals, competent and flexible managers, and knowledgeable and keen entrepreneurs. To achieve this status, the poor need education and an incentive--a work ethic--to both acquire that education and to use it. By its very nature, a re-distribution of wealth will remove that incentive.
Post a Comment