TribLIVE

| Opinion/The Review


 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Redistribution's fatal flaw

Daily Photo Galleries

Friday, March 29, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
 

President Obama's idea to “spread the wealth around” sounds great but doesn't work — and here's why.

John always saved during his career, so he had a comfortable nest egg when he retired. George made just as much money as John, but spent money as quickly as he got it. When George reached retirement age, he had little savings. Should government take money from John to pay for George's retirement?

Mary went to college and studied hard, found a great job and became wealthy. Suzie, who had the same IQ as Mary in high school, didn't go to college and worked a number of odd jobs her entire life. She barely scratched out a living. When Suzie reached retirement age, she had nothing. Should government take money from Mary and redistribute it to Suzie?

Liberals say “yes.” But if we continue down the redistribution path, future Johns might not save and future Marys might not work.

We cannot build a moral and self-reliant society by punishing success and rewarding failure because failure is an important way that people learn things. If we don't allow people to fail and accept the consequences of their decisions, then our civilization is on a fast track to extinction.

We can find a way to help the needy without bankrupting our finances or our morals.

Dave Majernik

Plum

 

 
 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Shame on Leechburg Area
  2. What happened to manners?
  3. Appreciating the Trib I
  4. Appreciating the Trib II
  5. Already lying
  6. ‘And another thing...’
  7. God smiled on get-together
  8. Bill to relieve suffering
  9. LED sign: Negative ad
  10. New policy falls short
  11. Rushing to judge
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.