The Redistribution of Wealth

The concept of The Redistribution of Wealth is a fallacious fairytale and a dangerous concept. Five things to consider are that the Redistribution of Wealth...

Violates Spiritual Law
Violates Ethical Principles
Exposes Proponent Hypocrisy
Encourages Laziness and Non-Productivity
Destroys our Children's Lives
1. The Redistribution of Wealth Violates Spiritual Law

The root of all human existence is based in spiritual law in which each soul progresses at its own rate through its own merit. Individuals do not make it to heaven, paradise or beyond by holding hands with others. Spiritual progress is an individual journey, not a collective one. God doesn't take a soul's good deeds and right actions and redistribute them to others, especially those who have not worked for their salvation. If God does not redistribute wealth, why would man think he can? In fact, he cannot. Doing so flies in the face of all that is natural and inherently divine.

2. The Redistribution of Wealth Violates Ethical Principles

In keeping with the principle of spiritual law is the principle of ethical law. "Your life; your responsibility." This is the essence of the human spirit. No one owes us a thing. It is up to each of us to accept responsibility for our life and make the best of it. If someone else chooses to work hard, exercise discipline, self-control, fortitude, persistence and sound life management, that person deserves to receive the fruit of his own efforts and no one has an ethical right to take what he has created for himself. To do so not only weakens the human spirit, it destroys it, and therefore it destroys human dignity in the process and with the destruction of human dignity the human race is destroyed.

3. The Redistribution of Wealth Exposes Proponent Hypocrisy

Interestingly, it is all too common and apparent for those who profess and teach the redistribution of wealth to not offer their own wealth in the redistribution process. Look at all the enormously wealthy people who promote redistribution of wealth. Are they redistributing their wealth? Are they giving away their millions and billions? Are they willing to live at the mean level of humanity? Preaching, teaching, promoting or promulgating the redistribution of wealth while not living by its philosophy is pure hypocrisy, dishonesty and deceit, as well as a blazingly red flag to those who are being asked to share their wealth with others.

4. The Redistribution of Wealth Encourages Laziness and Non-Productivity

When any human being is given something he or she does not deserve, that person becomes weak, lazy, non-productive and entitled-concepts that destroy the human spirit and undermine our society. Whole, sound, strong, independent and free people do not take from others. Taking from others is stealing.

5. The Redistribution of Wealth Destroys Our Children's Lives

Perhaps the most compelling reason of not living by a redistribution of wealth philosophy is that teaching our children to rely on others for their well-being weakens them, cripples them, destroys them. Life is difficult, but not teaching our children to rely solely on their own merits, efforts, and abilities in life will certainly destroy them. As our lives are our responsibilities, so our children's lives are their responsibilities and their children's lives will be their responsibilities. It's the way life is. Therefore, as parents we need to teach our children by our own example-not by preaching-to take charge of their own lives and not to rely on others or live with a sense of entitlement. We make our children strong by making them independent, resilient, resourceful, determined. This is the way we love them, not by making them weak by having them grow up in a mindset that they deserve what is not theirs to deserve.

The concept of the Redistribution of Wealth is anathema to the human spirit and an abomination to all that is divine. God rewards individually, not collectively, and certainly not politically. Man, if he is to reflect the highest principles of life and living, must do likewise. Personal ethics demand that each of us succeed on our own merit, not on the backs or efforts of others. Not to take responsibility for ourselves but to expect others to do for us when we are capable of doing for ourselves, is unethical and makes us weak and ignoble. Living by our own efforts and merits and teaching our children to do the same preserves our dignity and nobility.

Do those who preach the redistribution of wealth live by their preaching? Are they giving up their wealth? Or are they simply pandering to those who are weak, dependent, and seek to be taken care of by someone or something else while they remain in power to control the masses?

If we're to live a spiritual life, we must live by the concept that this is our life and it is our responsibility; it is no one else's responsibility to take care of us after we reach the age of adulthood. The redistribution of wealth is anathema to the divine human spirit. We succeed on our own merits. God demands nothing less; nor should we.

Capitalism only exists on the premise of solipsism. It's okay to rip people off if you can de-humanize and disregard the lives and stakes of others.

Greed disguised as mysticism

Oh yeah? Then feel free to stop corporate welfare, starting wars for profit, giving tax cuts to the rich, and perpetuating all the industrial complexes that exist soley to redistribute wealth from the working poor to the upper classes. The machinery of the state exists SOLELY for the purpose of wealth redistribution, but it carries out its redistribution from the bottom up, such that the top 1% controls 50% of this nation's wealth now.

By your own argument, your politics are now invalid. Smash the state. Wealth redistribution is bad, mmkay?

Before you flame consider the fact that if you push anything to it's extreme you eventually come across problems.

OP has listed some significant factors and if you value redistribution of wealth for whatever reason then these are factors that will have to be addressed in order for your policy to become a success.

>>4
It's more like redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the ruling elite who in turn redistributes some of that wealth to the working class whom are no longer self-sufficient due to decades of handouts and feel they are dependent on silver tongued liberals like Obama. Removing this part of the equation however doesn't involve cutting people off from their precious welfare checks, rather removing the corruption involved in redistribution of wealth, no more buying votes so they can lobby for loopholes.

>The root of all human existence is based in spiritual law..
>implying that the very concept of wealth is "just" or "moral"

ಠ_ಠ

Man, are you kidding?
Think about what a REAL libertarian society looks like and you'll be asking for a little levelling of the field pretty quick.

A society where the government helps nobody when they need it(no ambulances), who don't step in when luck is just horrible(no disability anything) and doesn't try to make the system less prone to fluctuation(interest rates stuff) is pretty ordinary

>>6
Why do you only tell the poor and middle classes that wealth is immoral? Why not strut up to an African kleptocratic dictator and do this?

>>1

Taxes are as old as civilization itself you retarded faggot. Your made up "rules", "entitlements", and "laws" don't mean shit.

>>8
Strawman. Immoral ≠ amoral.

Ayn rand was right about a few things. Altruism isn't always good, selfishness isn't synonymous with evil. The working and middle classes are always told they are selfish for leaving a light on or for not accepting an 50%+ tax rate for earning a 6 figure income, meanwhile the top 0.1% earn millions a year due to loopholes in the law and kickback schemes and give a far lower proportion back to society.

>>10
So if I give some wealth to a starving black baby that would be neither moral or immoral.

>>12
What I meant was that any distribution of wealth (including the current one) will not be an accurate reflection of what is moral or just. There is simply no system that will accomplish this. So to say that redistribution of wealth automatically violates morality is foolish since the current distribution is flawed and always will be.

>>1

I don't think money has much to do with spirituality, but even if it did, you seem to have a nonsequitor in the first premise.  Even if God (or the gods) don't practice group salvation does not mean that he (or they) treat all the other parts of life the same way.  God gives sunlight to the good and the evil -- no one earns it.  Same with rain.  Rain falls on the just and the unjust alike.

Secondly we live in societies -- no person produces everything for themselves.  You don't grow your own food, make your own clothes or computers.  So you have an interest in making society work as well as possible.  I think that means supporting some people who do the drudgework of the society.

New Wealth Experience : http://newwealthexperience.com