Of course not. It's unbelievably evil when you strip away all the disguises and folderol. Thats why they WON'T say it except in what they think is safe environs.
But all redistribution boils down to this simple salient fact. Someone else has something you want, so you take it by means of force through law, threat, fraud or violence. I think you have too much money, I can mug you, blackmail you, cheat you or just get my congressmen to get the IRS to take it from you.
Irrefutable fact of economics. If I have something, and someone takes it from me against my will, it's theft, no matter how you dress it up.
but some theft is more palatable than others.
Define fair. Is fair that everyone is treated equally by the same rules or that they all in the end have the same results? You're a result kinda guy, aren't you?
Fairness test #1:
If I work for someone at an agreed upon price, I should be paid the amount owed me regardless of what it is, according to our agreement. Fair or unfair?
Answer: If you do what the employer had asked in the agreement, then yes you should be paid whatever the agreement was between you and your employer, in which was agreed upon sure, but where it has gone wrong in the past, and where the fairness ended, is when the employer began implementing tactics that say you didnot deliver on purpose maybe, even if you did deliver (or) once the employer see's what you have gathered up for him, did it next become his wishes to decieve you and/or defraud you, (giving you less than was agreed upon somehow) in order to take the lion share of what you had gathered up for that employer, including some of your agreement pay, thus leaving you of course with a lower sum that you and he had not agreed upon in the beginning, yet he tries to pay you with anyway ? Meanwhile you had delivered so much more than what was expected in the deal, so why wouldn't you be compensated for you extra efforts (i.e. agreed upon pay + bonuses/raises or other), in which you had brought so much more to the table than what the original agreement had called for in the beginning ?
Communism or Socialism etc. does not allow for the tweaking of a contract between employee and the employer on purpose, and this it does mainly for greed reasons, nor does these types of operational methods as to be used, in which is employed by a corporation and/or many companies in America now, allow for the growth of an employee's talents to be recognized anymore on purpose, nor does it complement the employee when that employee excels above and beyond the rest.
This has become a major problem in America, and thus has led to the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer, because the rich have sold this nation out for greed, silver and gold, and they have done this at the expense of the nation, and it's workers who helped them gain their wealth in the beginning and all during this nations build up. They do this by what is claimed now at every turn, the "Global Competition", in which is showing up always now in the deal, even if it don't actually apply sometimes, yet it still shows up in the conversation or is used as a deal breaker, when it comes to the employee asking for anything better in the contract or deal.
Fairness Test #2:
If someone is financially struggling, regardless of reason, does their need justify them taking wealth from someone who is succeeding and financially stable. Fair or Unfair?
Answer: THis is a loaded question, because you are attempting to mix in problems not related to work (i.e. in your "regardless of reason" speak), that you happily injected as casting confusion into it (or) issuing a stumbling block "hoping" for me to fall over. Now I will say this, if a company had defrauded an employee or had held that employee back for greed reasoning only, while stealing the lion share of the wealth, or had enslaved that employee like it had done with the illegals (loving everything about them being illegal), then Houston we have had a series of problems, that have led to the serious decline of the middle class, thus creating the rich and the poor, having no middle to hold it all together anylonger.
Yes. People who don't earn money are getting it from those who DO earn money with no merit save that they are struggling in life.
So?
Answer: Ok, now where did the people come from? Do you actually know why so many are struggling, or is it easy for you to just throw them all into the same pot together (like companies love to do these days with their employee's), as so to protect the corps gross profits and their cronies in government in which hold them up, who have also been tied to all of this mess just as well ? Yes there are some who don't deserve what they are asking for, and yes they are career schemers who want to live off of government for ever, and not work or do the right things to help out, but they are fast being replaced by those who are not like this, thus the landscape is changing quickly, upon who is in the government cheeze lines these days, verses the old status quoe that ocuppied those lines in the past.
Incredibly assumptive that you imply ALL rich or even MOST rich do this. Start finding sources to back this generality. Bernie Madoff and Enron are exceptions, not the rule and they've been punished. Prove that they is a movement afoot to defraud workers.
(Answer one) - How about Millions of illegals that were working construction, maufacturing, the service industry, and etc, while the government was subsidizing it all for the rich while it was all going on?
Offshoring is a natural result of our current business laws, because we are a bad market risk for a LOT of business here. This cannot help but change for the better after Obama who has no businessmen in his staff save corporatist Jeffry Immelt. The worst business record since Wilson IIRC.
Capital is mobile in a global economy. I thought you leftists WANTED other nations to prosper. Capital also has little patriotism. What is owed to you and your community from any business? What merit do you have that they 'just can't leave'? I feel like I'm dealing with a Browns Fan in the Modell era.
Who won't close the border again? :::listens for crickets:::
yeah. The liberals are. And they're wrong about that too.
Michelle Malkin » Wonders Never Cease
dunno. It's not a world I'd call rational.
