Thursday, 1 March 2012

Why 'redistribution' based on income cannot end poverty.

The left love to talk about wealth redistribution - it seems so simple take money from those who appear to have a surfeit, and give it to those 'in poverty' and everything is rosy - no poor.

If the world ended the day after this mass redistribution then it would appear to have 'worked', but life is not static.

If the poor are 'given' wealth - what will they do with it? Well, presumably they will spend it and end up poor again... When they spend it, where will it go? Well, presumably to the 'wealthy people' where it came from, they got wealthy by selling things to the poor in the first place!

So a one off redistribution is (at best) a temporary 'fix', with the previous state soon returning. Ones next thought might be to make this 'redistribution' a regular event, or even a continuous process.

But if redistribution is repeated regularly or continuously, then we are taking money from the rich, giving it to the poor for the rich to earn back again. If the rich are only ever working to get their own money back, why would they bother at all? Being 'rich' simply entitles you to hand over your wealth to others - what is the point to it? So production stops and everyone is poor.

At least everyone being poor is 'equality' and so is 'fair' in some twisted way I guess.

No comments:

Post a Comment