Quotes About Redistribution

The Constitution is quite clear that the government has the right to tax in order to support its programs, but there is nothing in the Constitution to support redistribution of wealth.

Every organisation, whatever its character and whatever its purpose, involves some redistribution of power. There must be a government, which takes decisions in the name of the whole body, and has more power than the single members have, at any rate as regards the purposes for which the organisation exists.

A safety net for the poor indeed requires some level of income redistribution.

Income inequity has to be addressed.

You compare the nation to a parched piece of land and the tax to a life-giving rain. So be it. But you should also ask yourself where this rain comes from, and whether it is not precisely the tax that draws the moisture from the soil and dries it up. You should also ask yourself further whether the soil receives more of this precious water from the rain than it loses by the evaporation?

See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

It is all in vain; you cannot give money to some members of the community but by taking it from others. If you desire to ruin the tax-payer, you may do so. But at least do not banter him by saying: "In order to compensate your losses, I take from you again as much as I have taken from you already.

See whether the law takes from some persons that which belongs to them, to give to others what does not belong to them. See whether the law performs, for the profit of one citizen, and, to the injury of others, an act that this citizen cannot perform without committing a crime. Abolish this law without delay; it is not merely an iniquity—it is a fertile source of iniquities, for it invites reprisals;

Legal plunder has two roots: one of them, as we have already seen, is in human greed; the other is in misconceived philanthropy.

Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.

Legal plunder has two roots: one of them, as we have already seen, is in human egotism; the other is in false philanthropy. Before

The 'Grace of Kings' isn't a narrative about a return to some golden age, to a lost status quo ante. It portrays a dynamic world in transition, where the redistribution of power is messy, morally ambivalent, and only lurches toward more justice.

Some say the Constitution has robbed us of a proper land redistribution process. Others would want to look at other clauses. Well, it's South Africa. Everything is transparent and open for debate.

By 1938, the Greek state had redistributed about 40 percent of all arable land in Greece, creating some 310,000 small family farms, a revolutionary achievement that took place without the kind of bloody agrarian conflict so common elsewhere.

The truth is that the government cannot give if it does not take from somebody...It is not in the power of the government to make everybody more prosperous.

The crucial point is not how much somebody pays in taxes but rather how much she has left after paying. This biblical lesson has been invoked time and again to justify a tax code that calls on the rich to pay higher rates than the poor.

Essentially, Robin Hood put a smackdown on the medieval equivalent of the IRS.

At first it was the incomes of corporations, then of rich citizens, then of well-provided widows and opulent workers, and finally the wealth of housemaids and the tips of waitresses. This is all in line with the ability to pay doctrine. The poor, simply because there are more of them, have more ability to pay than the rich.

Robin Hood had it right.Humanity's deepest wish is to spread the wealth.

What counts today, the question which is looming on the horizon, is the need for a redistribution of wealth. Humanity must reply to this question, or be shaken to pieces by it.

The fundamental duel between which seemed to be that between colonialism and anti-colonialism, and indeed between capitalism and socialism, is already losing some of its importance. What counts today, the question which is looming on the horizon, is the need for a redistribution of wealth. Humanity must reply to this question, or be shaken to pieces by it.

The basic confrontation which seemed to be colonialism versus anti-colonialism, indeed capitalism versus socialism, is already losing its importance. What matters today, the issue which blocks the horizon, is the need for a redistribution of wealth. Humanity will have to address this question, no matter how devastating the consequences may be.

The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else.

But there is also another tendency that is common among people. When they can, they wish to live and prosper at the expense of others.