i received the following e-mail from my grandfather just now. it contains therein a quote, which i share with you below:
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
- Adrian Rogers
and i now share with you below my response (for which i am sure to catch hell; at least i didnt ‘reply all’)
my response to the statement by the questionable adrian rogers:
why does any one person need to have--and better yet, why should they have--more money than they need to survive, when the poor--who didn’t ask to be born into the first place, or be born into a poor household, or have unfortunate circumstances that prevent them from holding a triple-digit job, or who live in a country where nobody can get a job--are surviving on the pennies they receive from bottle-and-can returns--the only humbling job they can possibly get in this country that simply has no jobs. why are there no jobs? because most of the small business owners don’t have the money to employ them. who does have all the money? your corporate CEOs, your stock brokers, your wall street-shysters--the very same people who seem to need--and certainly most have--more money than they could possibly ever need to survive.
case in point: those who have more money than we humble, hard-working americans have (and for that are we not owed six figures a year?) probably don’t even deserve to have it in the first place. whereas we make our money supporting the elderly in nursing homes, broadening the depth of scientific knowledge, assisting special-needs children in elementary schools, etc., they get their outrageous sums of money through inheritance (the prerequisite to which is simply being born with the right last name), or through swindling others on the stock market, through bribes--through all manner of business practices to which one could attribute no other adjective than this: immoral.
so my question is this: why not tax the hell out of the minority that which holds the majority of US currency? does that not mean lower (or at least, not increased) taxes for us--the middle class--the working class? does that not mean more federal tax dollars to overhaul our health care system? our dying social security system? our childhood and secondary education programs?
and another question: why should the rich be able to practically burn money for fun while some of us are struggling to pay rent each month whilst engaging in entirely humane forms of labor? answer: they shouldn’t.
hows that for a "profound paragraph"?