Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Envy and Entitlement: The Immorality of Socialism
“I want these billionaires to stop being freeloaders,” demands Elizabeth Warren during an interview with CNBC.
“This extraordinary, unprecedented concentration of wealth and power and privilege must be broken apart,” says the former Texas congressman, Beto O’Rourke, to a cheering audience at his first presidential rally, “and opportunity must be shared with all.”
“Am I going to demand that the wealthy and large corporations start paying their fair share of taxes? Damn, right I will!” Bernie Sanders spewed at a CNN town hall.
These are sentiments from Democrat politicians on how to cure American’s problems. They are not alone, as 51% of 18- to 29-year-olds favor the redistribution of other people’s wealth, or the trendier title, socialism. I do not agree with socialism; mathematically it will not work. Historically, it has not worked. Not even close. Its body count is 100 million strong and growing as it has most recently destroyed the once vibrant economy of Venezuela.
But those are topics for another day. I want to focus on why socialism is simply immoral in its practice. In the words of modern-day sage Dennis Prager, “Socialism breeds envy and entitlement.”
To be considered in the top 1%, you need an annual income of $480,930. The top 10% of taxpayers make at least $138,031, although this varies from state to state. Bernie Sanders has proposed raising taxes on people making $250,000 or more.
I want to tell you about a couple I know very well. Because of the personal nature of this information and the fact that they don’t like the spotlight, I’m going to call them Mike and Jenny. Mike and Jenny are not billionaires, they are not millionaires, not even by a long shot. They are small business owners who fall in the top 10% range, and whenever taxes are raised at any level: local, state or federal, they feel it — like a nightstick to the knee cap.
Let me give you some background. Jenny’s parents were small business owners and they did well for themselves. Mike was raised in a very large family and was dirt poor. His family grew their food, fixed their cars, mended their clothes, and built their home. Both families worked hard, very hard, for everything they had, and those traits were instilled in Mike and Jenny.
Married in their early twenties with a combined college education of one year, they scrimped and saved for three years to become owners of a distributing business (think middleman, like Dunder Mifflin). That means they took a risk and a large loan to buy the rights to a business. If they did well, it meant money in their pockets (eventually). If they didn’t, well, that’s the risk you take. Thankfully for them after decades of hard work, frustrations, prayers, plenty of mistakes, and countless hours repairing worn-out work trucks, business is good and they are finally reaping the fruits of their tireless labors.
The far-left ideology of wealth redistribution suggests that certain people, like Mike and Jenny, don’t deserve their money — but the rest of the country does. This is immoral.
1) They already get taxed more than most.
Our federal tax rate is already progressive, which means the more money you make, the higher percentage your tax rate. A $250,000 gross income is currently taxed at 35%; that means $87,500 goes to the federal government. Bernie Sanders wants to take more.
Also, small businesses like Mike and Jenny’s get taxed up the wazoo, on average 19.8%.
If you are an employee and receive a W2 from your job, about 15% of your gross income goes to Social Security and Medicare; you only pay half as your employer pays the other half.
When you are self-employed you have no employer, so you pay that 15% entirely yourself. On top of that, you pay other taxes like state, unemployment, and sales; it adds up quick.
Let me put this in perspective. For years my husband was self-employed while I was a regular W2 employee. His gross income was 30% less than mine, even after deductions (write-offs for his business expenses), I paid 11% in federal taxes while he paid 14%.
If you are so envious and entitled to the wealth of others, try paying your taxes like they do.
2) They are penalized for growing their business.
Capital gains tax applies when a person or business sells something for more than its purchased price. So if you buy a piece of equipment, you pay sales tax. When you sell that equipment, you pay taxes (again) on the profit you made in the form of a capital gains tax.
When a business sells something and makes a profit, they then can turn around and use that money (or capital) to invest in their business; hire more staff, give raises, contract with builders and utility companies, etc. When a business grows it brings more jobs and money to a community. That is how capitalism works.
When the capital gains tax is high, why would a business want to sell anything if they have to give a large chunk of that profit to the government? In their 30 years’ experience, Mike and Jenny notice when the capital gains tax is high, they and the many business owners they know don’t sell their capital because they don’t want to get taxed at such exorbitant rates. So they hold on to their money instead of putting it back into their business; their business does not grow and neither does the surrounding community.
They find the opposite is true when the taxes are lower. And the higher your tax bracket – you guessed it – the higher your capital gains tax.
3) They work really hard for their money.
There has been a lot of attention on teachers these past couple years, and the hard work and long hours they dedicate to their jobs. I understand this because I have been a teacher. After getting to know Mike and learning about what he does, I can honestly tell you that my busiest week as a teacher is normal for him. Leaving the house at 3:30 a.m. (you read that correctly), often putting in a 12-hour day, a 60+ hour workweek tallies up quick. Between time spent at his office, loading his trucks, delivering to customers, managing his staff, payroll, repairing trucks, maintaining equipment, racing two hours away to corporate to manage a fire, taking work home every day including weekends; it does not stop. Jenny also puts in time, helping wherever needed be it deliveries, paperwork, or customer relations. According to a New York Enterprise Report, this is the norm, as small business owners work twice as much as regular employees.
Sick days? Those don’t exist. If you have a dire emergency, customers still need to get their product. Broken shoulder, three feet of snow, or a pesky cold…
…still don’t get you a day off.
Vacation days? Those didn’t happen for the first four years and were few and far between. It took about 15 years until Mike and Jenny could take regular vacations, even still those are interrupted with phone calls and worry about the business … it’s not really relaxing.
Now you might be thinking, That is the profession they chose and they are compensated very well for it, no sympathy here!
You are correct. They did choose that profession and its consequences. Here’s the thing though: they do not complain or look at those who make more than they do and demand a piece of their wealth. Entitled and envious people do. They made their choices and blame no one for what they lack, relying solely on themselves to advance. Entitled and envious people blame everyone for what they lack, and demand that others make them advance.
4) They are generous with their money.
This is the biggest irritant for me. Leftists like to demonize groups of people; clumping all individuals together and branding them with negative labels, in this case, “greedy.” A commonplace lie about the rich is that they oppose having more of their own earnings taken by the government, therefore they are greedy. This is a smear to make socialists come off as generous and benevolent, even though they are the ones advocating to take other people’s money.
Mike and Jenny are some of the most generous people I know, be it with their money, time, or resources. From volunteering hours with Boy Scout and church groups, hosting weddings for people who cannot afford the costs, gift cards left for hotel housekeepers, looking after the elderly and widows, housing family and friends, planning funerals, donating to causes close to their heart; service is at the core of their lives and it is incalculable to put a price tag on the generosity they’ve bestowed to others.
They are not alone; according to the latest data, 51.6% of charitable donations came from households with annual incomes of $100,000 or more. According to his tax statements, Bernie Sanders’ charitable donations come to 5% of his income; I pay more than that.
5) They are smart with their money.
Rich people don’t get rich from being dumb with their money. For example, The National Study of Millionaires found that millionaires usually spend less on monthly groceries and dining out than the average American. Mike and Jenny are not dumb with their money, they do not live a lavish lifestyle — at all. Their beautiful 2,800-square-foot home is a far cry from the single-wide trailer their kids were born in. Mike built it from the ground up—literally. From the foundation to the roof, his hands put in the time every night for a year, saving them thousands. Still, their home is modest, as is their appearance. In fact, if you saw them you’d have no idea of their success.
They also live within their means and use what they have. They’ve put over 550,000 miles (yep, you read that correctly) into a ragged old truck they bought used in 1991, and the thing is still going strong! Mike finally updated to a shiny new vehicle … in 2010. Let me make this clear: Mike was 50 years old the first time he bought a brand-new vehicle for himself. According to Credit Sesame, the average auto loan balance for consumers under 25 is $12,128, and $10,778 for the 25-34 age group.
This is the same demographic petitioning, protesting, and screaming that the “freeloaders” at the top, like Mike: pay-off their student loans, buy their contraception, provide them free college, subsidize $15/hour wages for their minimum skills/minimum training/minimum education jobs, and foot the bill for their health care.
Envious and entitled people make these demands. And such demands are immoral.
This couple is not unique in their qualities. I know a man who built an incredibly successful one-person business through his own unrelenting efforts, and if you met him you’d have no idea of his immense wealth because he’s just a normal, good guy.
You will find commendable and despicable behaviors on both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum; I’ve known the daughter of an Upper East Side Socialite who was bratty, spoiled, and manipulative. I’ve also known the daughter of an Upper East Side Socialite who was kind, caring, and down-to-earth. I’ve been snapped at by a country club woman for not knowing she meant “half salad” when she ordered “a salad” and I’ve been screamed at by a single mom who demanded free childcare, no strings attached, simply because she was a single mom.
I’ve seen people, more times than I can count, lie on applications so they can “qualify” for more government benefits. I knew a single mother who lived almost entirely off taxpayers; housing, childcare, Medicare, food stamps – yet she somehow managed to get breast implants. I know another single mother who made a lucrative career for herself being a housekeeper; owning her home and two vehicles, she worked tirelessly to create a great life for her family. I’ve waited on uppity old couples who treated me like I was the help, while others treated me like a granddaughter. And I’ve sat in the most humble of homes with people who personify the old adage, “they’d give you the shirt off their back.”
It’s not a money issue – it’s a character issue.
Every person is an individual and deserves to be treated as such. Didn’t someone famous once implore Americans to judge a man by the content of his character…
Oh, that’s right! Dr. Martin Luther King had a dream where the peoples of this nation would not judge a man based on the color of his skin. I argue he would add to that what they wear, where they live, what they drive, what they do for a living, or how much money they make. His dream was one of people looking at the individual and seeing them for who they truly are, not what our prejudices see. And lately, our country has fallen for some very destructive and false prejudices about people with money.
Which America are you part of? The envious and entitled crowd whose coveting of stuff, other people’s stuff, is so blinding they see fit to change the very foundation of the greatest country the world has ever seen. Or are you a part of the America Martin Luther King envisioned? The one that judges individuals by their character, never spiteful but learning from their successes.
That is the America I was raised in. And the America I choose to be a part of today.
What You Can Do
- Educate yourself about what socialism really is. Research: William Bradford, John Smith, and the agricultural socialism of Plymouth and Jamestown, Carl Marx, Frederich Engels, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Fidel Castro, and Hugo Chavez.
- Register to vote.
- Vote for candidates who demonstrate they understand how amazing America is and don’t vilify the rich and successful.
- Work or volunteer for a campaign.
- Pray for our country.
- Don’t demonize others. All ____ people are not all _____ all the time.
- Stop judging people by how much money they make. Stop judging people based on how you imagine they are. Stop judging people — that’s it. Just stop judging people. You’ll be better off. So will our country.
Published in Politics
Thank you for focusing on Mike and Jenny, as well as your own household.
In the end, all that Warren, Sanders and Yang and the rest of them will do is stick it to the Mike’s and Jenny’s, as well as to our households. Meanwhile the billionaires will flee the country, or else occasionally visit their money held in the Cayman Islands.
It appeals to the very young voters, and to the senior citizens who have their homes paid for and our living off the pensions their now dead husbands left them. To us working people, well, we know the truth.
To anyone living inside a major American metropolis, $ 100K is just about going to get you by, if you are a young family and don’t own a home with its protective mortgage deduction. Yet when they point to people who annually make $ 100K, young voters think that amount is a lot of money. (Especially if they’ re still in school.)
Having my own business for 30 or so years I can attest to everything you say and more. A large part of why I sold my business is that I was fed up with everyone feeding of of me. You just touched on the taxes paid by a business. I had three facilities and the real estate taxes were over $ 100,000 a year. Electric, natural gas, water, phone were all taxed at rates higher than residential taxes and the rates charged for the service were also higher. The taxes for my ten trucks were about 20 times higher than a personal car. I could go on and on but the important thing is at some point the incentive is diminished.
Additionally, read about why capitalism works. I suggest a primer on Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. (2-pager). Adam Smith is from a small pool of enlightened people that also brought us the US Constitution and a Christian Manifest Destiny.
All true. But Democrat politicians and celebrities don’t really believe what they say about the rich paying out the nose. They themselves are rich and pay accountants to minimize tax payments.
Nor do gumshoe Democrats and leftists offer any coherent definitions of socialism or capitalism. The words are mere slogans to the Left, distinguishing the nebulous Utopia they desire from the injustices, both real and imagined, and the unfortunate conditions they see.
What principle should govern the distribution of the costs of running government? What tests should we apply to a proposed principle to determine how good or bad the principle is?
Elizabeth Warren has made a lot of money by tricking people. She raked in a small fortune from the people she now despises – lobbyists, rich people and Wall Street types.
As a ‘working man’ who was employed by others for 45 years I have to note that I never got a single job created by a poor person. If we manage to destroy the ‘rich’ we will also have destroyed the jobs that common folk like me need. By living within our income we were able to raise and educate 4 kids to responsible adulthood and retire comfortably. Try that in any socialist country.
We have a local leftist guy who periodically writes a guest column in our paper. One repeated theme he uses is how the wealthy are greedy. I have written rebuttal letters, but that never stops a leftist from repeating his propaganda.
The biggest irritant for me is when he spews Democrat party nonsense about how “the wealthy got rich on the backs of the poor.” If the poor have that much money, then why are they poor? Furthermore, the Democrats have yet to show me how rich people force the poor to give them their money, or how the rich people rob the poor.
The left doesn’t believe wealth is created, only stolen by the rich from the poor or taken from the rich to be redistributed to the poor. A finite reservoir of wealth. I imagine wealth creation is as complex as anything in our world, but is there an explanation you might recommend that might be simple enough for me to convey to my leftist relatives and friends? It may not convince, but may open a crack in their minds. Right now, I couldn’t even try.
There are two basic mis-understandings that make people vulnerable to the Lefts fear mongering about the wealthy: Money & History.
People are taught and have come to believe that money = wealth when it is actually only a convenient way to trade wealth. Unfortunately that is a complicated subject and can’t be reduced to a few simple statements. There are many good books on the subject of money but just as many bad ones.
Secondly history is not really taught well at all in schools nor in popular media. The reason mankind developed governments through a long and arduous process was to have protection against those who wanted to steal their stuff beginning but not ending with food and other necessities. When governments become an agent of that theft they have not just perverted their basic purpose but actually become the antithesis of the valid purpose of having government in the first (and last) place. It has been the unfortunate history of governments for all of recorded history that when those who think it is better or at least easier to take from those who produce than to be productive discover ways to get their government to do the taking for them those charged with being the protectors become the predators. This happens slowly and is always justified by saying they are ‘leveling the playing field’ or such nonsense. The great tragedy is that those who agitate for the ‘leveling’ quickly become its greatest victims.
Hopefully someone else will be able to give you the short/sweet stories/explanations you seek.
Small business owner myself. Our first few years were very lean, and though we’re doing well know, we’re not huge. Taxes are a huge bite every year, easily the equivalent of multiple salaries, or (if you add up a few years worth) enough to buy a lot of capital equipment and a bigger facility. Instead it’s all hoovered away.
Doctors used to be small business owners. I was for 30 years. Obamacare has changed that. I don’t know how many are aware of that. What happened was that hospitals, like the one I practiced in for 30 years, anticipated big income from Obamacare because it was going to force everyone to buy insurance and gold plated insurance, too. Obamacare was written by insurance companies. I’ve gone through this explanation elsewhere but will do it again.
Insurance companies HATE health insurance. It’s a loser and politics has destroyed it. They do like being an Administrative Service Organization. That means they process claims and the employer pays the bills, including their fees for the processing. It’s a no lose operation. Obamacare was designed to be the same except Uncle Sam was the payer. One problem; the Democrats never had the nerve to force all the employer based plans to convert to Obamacare. They knew it would be an electoral disaster.
So, Obamacare is basically an expanded Medicaid with the middle class subscribers paying the bill. That’s why premiums are high and deductibles are astonishing. Hospitals are over invested in doctors’ practices because they bought them all in anticipation of a bonanza, Plus it allows them to control utilization. Administrators hate doctors. I’ve talked to them about it. We did not take orders and even paid more attention to patients than we did to the administrator.
As a result, most doctors in places like California are now on salary. They are no longer small business people. They will vote like employees, not small businesspeople.
Even someone as stupid and dense as Cuomo got it eventually. Look at bullets 2 and 4. They are the answer to arguments about rich “paying their fair share.” BTW, what is your fair share of something others worked for? ( Thomas Sowell’s question; not mine, but worth repeating.)
Socialism is based on one person or a small group of people telling everyone else what they will buy and what they will make. It is inherently based on people bossing everyone else around. Socialism rewards the people who maneuver themselves into the positions in which they get to boss everyone else around. The wants, needs, interests, or concerns of most people are irrelevant to those in power.
Capitalism (or a market economy) rewards people who figure out what other people want or need. Capitalism rewards those who learn about other people. People (customers) choose of their own volition to buy the product or service that Mike and Jenny sell. Mike and Jenny figured out a product or service that others want or need. That requires Mike and Jenny to learn about and to understand other people. Capitalism incentivizes Mike and Jenny to consider the wants, needs, interests, or concerns of their fellow human beings. That is a moral system.
You’d like reading Mises. One of his greatest discoveries is the same as yours, that in a market society, producers are the slaves of consumers. The doctrine of the “consumer sovereignty.” He’s candid about it: consumers aren’t nice bosses, in fact they are heartless. They will destroy a business, one that a family put everything into, without a moment’s thought, just to save 5%. It seems like a system that could be made more compassionate, by socialism, but it turns out that as tough as it is, everything else is much worse.
As important as the five characteristics Mike and Jenny have is the one characteristic they DON’T have: covetousness.
Leftism really is diabolical. It tempts us to believe the sin of covetousness is a civic virtue.
I have been disturbed by the number of sermons I have heard in (mostly mainline denomination) Christian churches that laud coveting the wealth of others (granted they don’t use that particular word, but they do describe the attitude) so that “we the correct people” can use that wealth of others for the priorities of “we the correct people.”
Well said @caroljoy, I completely agree. The “everybody wins” generation are going from mom and dad’s to the government and skipping adulthood.
Oh @phcheese, I feel for you. They really have made it difficult for business owners (and want to make it more difficult). Do you discuss this with other people? Particularly people on the left? I really think a lot of them are misinformed and truly do not understand.
Love it @dong, I will definitely look into those, thank you!
@markcamp we could start with the deficit…spending within one’s means is more than reasonable for individuals and businesses, why not the government?
@stad in all my observations and studies, I find the left is the “feel-good” party. Emotions before facts and misguided compassion sends voters their way.
@django what was the context of this clip?
Amen! Well said @fullsizetabby.
That’s scary @raygunner, I fully believe that taxation/socialism is a counterfeit for charity, as taught and lived by Christ. It’s a fake/feel good and easier substitute. But that’s a totally different post altogether.
There was a video of Cuomo giving his explanation of the fragility of the New York economy.. I don’t know if it’s still around, but it was the source of the phrase “Tax the rich. We did. … God forbid that they leave.”
He pointed out to his critics that the rich have the ability to move wherever they want and if taxed enough, they will.
@django I think this was a comment by Governor Cuomo about the impact of the recent tax cuts. I understand they decreased the amount of state tax that could be deducted from your federal taxes. In the picture you can see the numbers. The governor commented that they were already seeing the flight of higher earners from New York.
@chrisgregerson , Here is the video. The chart I showed is introduced at approximately 9:54. Yes, he was discussing the tax changes and the limits on deductions, but the point about how much of the tax burden the rich bear is most important for discussion about “fair share”.
And many of us are now reluctant to see doctors at all.
In addition to being in servitude to Big Insurers, they are also in servitude to Big Pharma. So if you want a peppy sales talk about the reasons for getting a vaccine, or whatever newest med has rolled off Pharma’s assembly line, by all means see a doctor.
Until my spouse was hospitalized in May of 2019, I thought maybe doctors still could be relied on for diagnosing major health problems, such as a ruptured appendix. But they really no longer do diagnosis. Instead, once they have spent an hour determining that you are not there in the ER seeking pain meds, they will reluctantly order some tests. Then the flunkie off somewhere in Southeast Asia who reads the cat scan decides all is well.
If I had not insisted on a second reading of said cat scan, my spouse would have been sent home with the ruptured appendix. My other thoughts on the matter are not possible on this family-rated site.