Yes, spreading the wealth is giving your money to people who haven't worked for it. But, sometimes
those people need the help. There are some who try hard to make it in society, yet they get rejected
despite their efforts. I think that it is good to spread the wealth sometimes (for those who truly
deserve it).
The popular term is "redistribution of wealth" and the concept was advocated by karl marx (father of
socialism) who said, from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
Translation: Those who are most able in our society have a responsibility to care for those with
the highest need.
The flaw in this philosophy is that you can certainly pass laws to make sure everyone is living in
similar circumstances, but you cannot legislate the application of talent. If you remove the
reward, you will eliminate much of the incentive for achievement.
What else could it be? It takes from one group and gives to another for nothing more than because
one group has more than the other. Socialism. Liberalism. Whatever you want to call it....it sucks
for the hardworking members of society.
It includes them (that in turn includes those who cannot work). But then your statement ignores
those who do work hard for little pay, those who work hard caring for a relative, the pensioners who
have worked hard all their lives, some even fought wars for us. I am sure this list can be added
to.
17 Dec 2008 19:54
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
