Quotes About Wealth

The American left's motto comes from the English Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw: "Any government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always count on Paul's support.

For the Obamas, no money-making scheme is too petty; Michelle rakes in the bucks by charging even nonprofit groups $225,000 to speak and sells 25 different items of merchandise—mugs, shirts and candles—on the speaking circuit.

Cautioning against socialist wealth confiscation schemes, Lincoln told a delegation of workingmen during the Civil War, "Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another, but let him labor diligently and build one of his own."28

Does it follow, then, that progressives and socialists are entirely wrong when they say that there are rich people in the top 1 percent who are greedy selfish leeches, who don't deserve their money and who have gotten it by contributing little or nothing to society? Actually, no! Such people do exist, and they can be found among the ranks of the progressives and socialists themselves. Let's consider a few notorious examples.

Buffett has become the entrepreneur whom progressives endlessly flatter, because he flatters their prejudices and

In Obama's America, the wealth creators are greedy, selfish, and materialistic while the wealth stealers are the most morally wonderful people in the country.

Unequal prosperity is better than shared poverty.

But I do know that people who have made their own money are likely to spend it more carefully and discerningly than a group of politicians and bureaucrats. We all have a natural tendency to be more responsible with our own possessions than with those that belong to someone else.

Summing up, we can see that the progressive pitches about greed, selfishness, and inequality are basically diversions. They seek to deflect us away from the core issue, which is that the creators of the wealth are the ones who deserve the wealth they have created. To put it in primitive terms, the farmer who grew the crops gets to keep the crops and the hunters who killed the deer get to eat the deer.

This is the progressive, socialist parasitic class, feeding off the wealth of society while reviling the free market system that produced that wealth. If anyone deserves to be horsewhipped, it's these progressive and socialist Democrats. As for entrepreneurs, we need more of them. If the socialists are helping to destroy the country, entrepreneurs are helping to make America great again.

Progressives may privately consider themselves superior, but they know they cannot include that claim in their pitch. Consequently they claim superiority by default. In a society where government controls things and distributes wealth, the power of the bureaucrat becomes predominant.

For most Democrats, the topic is both touchy and distasteful. It's one thing to rob from the rich but quite another to rob from the poorest of the poor. Some of the Democratic primary support for Bernie Sanders was undoubtedly due to Democrats' distaste over the financial shenanigans of the Clintons. Probably these Democrats considered the Clintons to be unduly grasping and opportunistic, an embarrassment to the great traditions of the Democratic Party.

Alinsky profited handsomely from his rackets. Even Hillary Clinton notes in her thesis that while Alinsky spoke endlessly about poverty and disadvantage, he himself lived very comfortably, far removed from the people on whose behalf he allegedly fought.21

The progressive pretense is that these people, who have created virtually nothing, are actually the real creators of the nation's wealth.

We remain the custodians of the idea that wealth should be obtained through

America is founded on the understanding that wealth can be created through innovation and enterprise. Through the system of technological capitalism, we can go from ten marbles to twenty marbles without taking anyone's marbles.

The larger picture is that the socialist camp wants high, even confiscatory, income tax rates, complemented by additional levies on wealth and, in some cases, even compulsory worker control of large industries—which gets us closer to the classic, never-before-achieved Marxian conception of socialism.

Inequality of outcomes is not seen as a necessary evil that government should seek to remedy; rather, the government itself exists to guard citizens' right to accumulate unequal fortunes and property.

socialism is the ideology of thieves and

In all ages of the world, some have labored, and others have, without labor, enjoyed a large proportion of the fruits. This is wrong, and should not continue.1 —Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Labor, 1847

What kind of generosity is it that forcibly seizes and then disburses other people's money? This is not generosity; it's larceny.

The Obamas do not seem abashed to enjoy their newfound largesse. They now own a $2.5 million home in Chicago's Hyde Park and a mansion in Washington, D.C., worth $8 million. The D.C. property, in the exclusive Kalorama neighborhood, has 8,200 square feet, including nine bedrooms, a two-tiered flagstone terrace with a courtyard and parking space for 8–10 cars.

I wonder if there isn't a catch about having plenty of money? Does it eventually take the pleasure out of things?

I could marry the Devil himself if he had some money.