Why can’t rich people spend their money in a manner more pleasing to people who resent never figuring out how to make more? The obnoxious achievers are already super jerks for not signing over their ivory checks to those who truly deserve it, namely those who haven’t earned it.
Consider the recent sanctimoniously bizarre example of rich people who demand to be taxed at even more absurd rates. Our financial and moral betters think everyone is a charitable miser except them. They modestly claim they’re philanthropic, and they naturally don’t trust others to be the same.
For one, Alec Baldwin bragging about paying taxes stands as his best work in recent memory. Read his snide tweets aloud in a melodramatically raspy voice for full effect.
Charity-deducting specialists are inspired by a most self-loathing president. Barack Obama resembles a cat in his limited range of reactions, and not a fun LOL kitteh-style way, either.
His predictability is best exemplified by how he’s unwittingly inured us to the phrase “fair share,” which should make conservatives like him nearly as much as they should for his refusal to shutter Gitmo so we still have a place to store Earth’s biggest jerkfaces. Obama makes the case for limited government every time he tries to make a case for whatever tripe he believes.
But why do you want to throw the destitute into yacht-powering furnaces, Mister Rich Uncle or Aunt Pennybags? Cutting some people’s entitlements lacks compassion; it’s much better to give all people an insolvent government. Shamefully shameless politicians thinking with their hearts may not have ameliorated poverty at all, but they at least gave us $15 trillion in debt.
The entitled types who have concluded that collective bargaining is a constitutional right are always surprised to learn that nobody owes anyone work. The only thing more startling to the gimme class is that the rich can do whatever they want with earnings.
Absent evidence of fraud, it’s their cash to spend, invest, loan, fritter, bury, or burn so they may keep toasty or ignite cigars. Or maybe property rights are only for people who don’t pull down a quarter of a million per year.
And groups of thriving people are merely good at concentrating evil. Nefarious companies enable a comfortable civilization at rock-bottom prices.
Corporate greed explains why, say, a company with no genuine competitors like Amazon charges so much for such a lousy selection and infamously lousy customer service, except for how they don’t. Cornering the market works as long as countless entrepreneurs aren’t lurking about and waiting to pounce on the bloated predator. Greedy monoliths give you everything you could possibly want at 30 percent off.
Free-market fans are not fighting for the wealthy. They’re not on the side of the middle class, either, for that matter, or those who sell plasma for a living. The goal is to ensure that the economy is unaligned with any class. Those who spew frightening platitudes about “economic justice” don’t realize that we won’t reach their desired state until everyone is indifferent to how much everyone else makes.
Financial libertarians are fighting for a level playing field where players can gain territory without either racing downhill or struggling up a severe grade. The government is supposed to be a groundskeeper, not a landscaper who piles dirt on one side of the pitch.
But those who think the appetite for public largesse is never large enough envision the feds as referees who are tasked with ensuring a tie. They express their concerns about others being successful by constantly noting that the amount a CEO makes is exponentially more than a janitor in the same building does. Sure, they’re technically doing different jobs. But it’s still so unfair.
They also enjoy using their ample free moments focusing upon the growing disparity between lower- and higher-wage earners. Try to explain how ratios and percentages work, and they’ll start shrieking about “Faux News” or such.
Blaming their favorite right-wing bogeymen is easier than offering proof of shenanigans. The only evidence of programs that benefit CEOs ironically comes in the form of bailouts from the government whose intervention the class warfare warriors otherwise adore. The idea that executives offer more and do jobs that few are capable of doing smacks of one-percent elitism, which makes it that much more appealing.
Those who trade in envy have yet to explain how one person getting paid more harms someone who didn’t gain as much. If a private company wants to compensate the boss significantly more than the guy who empties same boss’s trash can, it’s a matter for shareholders.
The alternative is to engage in an impolite obsession with others’ incomes that borders on masturbatory glee. Don’t judge them for their fetishes.
Worrying over what others make is easier than making their own. Envy is somehow fine when you desire to spend someone else’s income.
But coherence is too much to ask from those who want the government out of our bedrooms and into our checkbooks. No matter where something happens in your house, redistribution experts are jealous that someone is doing it better than them.
Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. He tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.