PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?




what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading






babalú features





recent comments


  • Humberto Fontova: You’re right!–Che was “Best-man” (“witness?”) at Raul’s wedding with Hilda...

  • asombra: The AP is just being ironic, obviously.

  • asombra: Kerry’s reply: Dear Congresspersons: Really, I’d have thought you’d have wised up by now. This is a DEM...

  • asombra: On the bright side, this solves the Chesimard problem. Have her renounce US citizenship and stay outside the US, and just drop...

  • asombra: Never mind the beer; just make sure paramedics are on standby. I assume a designated minder for Alberto has been selected.

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

don’t miss these


Babalú @ Molina Art Gallery

gen-n-top sidebar ad.jpg

staIBDeditLogo.gif

Thomas Sowell on redistribution

Since the idiot class (liberals and progressives) are all in a huff about "context" and Obama's now infamous 1998 redistribution tape, I thought I'd give you the perfect antidote to the stupidity being spewed. Here's Thomas Sowell in the American Spectator:

The Fallacy of Redistribution

The recently discovered tape on which Barack Obama said back in 1998 that he believes in redistribution is not really news. He said the same thing to Joe the Plumber four years ago. But the surfacing of this tape may serve a useful purpose if it gets people to thinking about what the consequences of redistribution are.

Those who talk glibly about redistribution often act as if people are just inert objects that can be placed here and there, like pieces on a chess board, to carry out some grand design. But if human beings have their own responses to government policies, then we cannot blithely assume that government policies will have the effect intended.

The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty. The communist nations were a classic example, but by no means the only example.

In theory, confiscating the wealth of the more successful people ought to make the rest of the society more prosperous. But when the Soviet Union confiscated the wealth of successful farmers, food became scarce. As many people died of starvation under Stalin in the 1930s as died in Hitler's Holocaust in the 1940s.

How can that be? It is not complicated. You can only confiscate the wealth that exists at a given moment. You cannot confiscate future wealth -- and that future wealth is less likely to be produced when people see that it is going to be confiscated. [...]

Don't expect this common sense to penetrate into the hardest (and smallest) thing in the universe: the liberal brain...

Comments are closed.