once again...my friend Walter E. Williams chimes in...

Edgar K. Browning, professor of economics at Texas A&M University, has a new book aptly titled "Stealing from Each Other." Its subtitle, "How the Welfare State Robs Americans of Money and Spirit," goes to the heart of what the book is about. The rise of equalitarian ideology has driven Americans to steal from one another. Browning explains that certain kinds of equality have been a cherished value in America. Equality under the law and, within reason, equality of opportunity is consistent with a free society. Equality of results is an anathema to a free society and within it lie the seeds of tyranny.

Browning entertains a discussion about when inequalities are just or unjust. For example, college graduates earn income higher than high-school dropouts. Some people prefer to work many hours and earn more than others who prefer to work fewer. Students who spend 25 or more hours a week on classroom preparation earn higher grades than students who spend five hours. Most would agree that these inequalities are just. There are other sources of inequalities that are unjust, such as: when incomes result from fraud, corruption, stealing, exploitation, oppression and the like. Such sources of inequality play an insignificant role in producing income inequality in America. Most economists agree that income is closely related to productivity.

Much of the justification for the welfare state is to reduce income inequality by making income transfers to the poor. Browning provides some statistics that might help us to evaluate the sincerity and truthfulness of this claim. In 2005, total federal, state and local government expenditures on 85 welfare programs were $620 billion. That's larger than national defense ($495 billion) or public education ($472 billion). The 2005 official poverty count was 37 million persons. That means welfare expenditures per poor person were $16,750, or $67,000 for a poor family of four.

Those figures understate poverty expenditures because poor people are recipients of non-welfare programs such as Social Security, Medicare, private charity and uncompensated medical care. The question that naturally arises is if we're spending enough to lift everyone out of poverty, why is there still poverty? The obvious answer is poor people are not receiving all the money being spent in their name. Non-poor people are getting the bulk of it.

Browning's concluding chapter tells us what the welfare state costs us. He acknowledges the non-economic costs such as infringements on liberty and strains on the political process, but focuses on the quantitative economic costs. The disincentive effects of Social Security have reduced the GDP by 10 percent, the federal income tax (as opposed to a proportional tax) by 9 percent and past deficits by 3.5 percent for a total of 22.5 percent. He guesses that welfare programs have reduced GDP by 2.5 percent. The overall effect of redistributionist policies has created incentives that have reduced GDP by a total of 25 percent. Without those, our GDP would be close to $18 trillion instead of $14 trillion.

So what's Browning's solution? First, he reminds us of the biblical admonition "Thou shalt not steal." Government income redistribution programs produce the same result as theft. In fact, that's what a thief does; he redistributes income. The difference between government and thievery is mostly a matter of legality. Browning's solution is captured in the title of his last chapter, "Just Say No," where he proposes, "The federal government shall not adopt any policies that transfer income (resources) from some Americans to other Americans." He agrees with James Madison, the father of our Constitution, who said, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."

Well tithing in the bible said the rich had to take 10 percent of their wealth and share it with the poor of their village,Right?

10% ?....I'm sure the percentage is now much higher...

Then why the F**K do we have to take 25% more than the poor pay to distribute to the poor? (in case you don't know math, that's 35%-10%=25%)

So, our good deed to the poor has been more than paid for quite some time now with how many years we have been paying more than 10%, right?

WRONG!!!!

Lindyy

Is it fun for you two to keep putting people down?

how are you supposed to feel superior if you can't look down on people?

Winx,

If that is a put down, look at the level of education for America verses Japan.

You need to get off yourself and look at a broader perspective. No one is "out to get you". These are just facts, not put downs. I AM an American, too, and I would like to know that my children are getting a better education than that which is currently provided.

Tina

Well even thought I side with conservatives in theory...I disagree that that's what has been going on. Corp welfare is not FREE enterprize. I also think the burden shouldn't be put on small businesses & cos. that actually are located & employ people in our nation.

The entire fiscal structure needs revamping to INCLUDE real free enterprize as well as working class issues, not the cop out welfare/natl. healthcare sell out.

I wouldn't know. I've never felt superior to anyone or had a desire to feel that way.

If you have never felt superior, why do you expect people to hand you their hard-earned money just because you are not young anymore and you have children?

Okay folks, lets try to stay on topic without the insults/attacks.

Robin - Site Mod

What makes you think that I'm expecting people to hand their money over to me? When have I ever said that I'm not young anymore and have children? You don't know anything about me.

Again, I don't feel superior to anybody and don't feel the need to feel superior.

damn !...I go workout for two hours...only to return to full fledge ' cat fight "...lol...meowwwwwww

Giocamo...one more time...I know you love saying it but...

Despite the appealing imagery that the word cat fight sometimes conjures up for some people two women disagreeing isn't any more a cat fight than two men disagreeing.

You are our favorite son of Italy no doubt and I always read your posts but I think if you really want a cat fight there are some other sites out there that might offer a more satisfying version of a cat fight.

okay...I'll concede you that...so then let's call it a Kitten Fight...meowwwwwwww....psst...***where's those sights***...lol

I guess my question would be do you think that all social service should be eliminated?

My second question is, do you actually think that a person with a higher education works hard than lets say a farmer?

My final question is how would you propose to give everyone an equal opportunity to such an education without social services?

no
maybe
dunno

No, I do not think social services should be eliminated. What's that quote? The measure of a society is how it chooses to care for those who cannot care for themselves?

I don't think education alone determines how hard a person works. There is unique value in the work each part of a system does. This is easily illustrated by looking at say the production of corn. Look at all the the hands that lend in it's production. Not just the farmer works. The scientist that perfects the seed, the pesticide and the fertilizer. The truckerss that deliver those products. The mechanics who work on the trucks and in the plants that make them. The accountants who manage all different parts of the financial process. The list goes on. If just one or two of those hard working cogs are removed the corn is not produced. Who works the hardest? That's debatable.

To give everyone an equal opportunity at an education I would fund each student equally. Every public school should receive an equal share per student to start with. The answer to this one is complex but that would be a good start I think.

those that cannot care for themselves should be left to the sick, children, elderly, and the mentally challenged... those that cannot physically help themselves due to lacking the mental or physical capacity. not families that are more than capable of holding a job. welfare needs to go away. medicare needs to be revamped to get rid of the $60 billion in fraud yearly.

I have no issue helping those that cannot help themself but if you can? tough sh*t.

and education is not going to fix disparity. drive and personal motivation are far larger influences than throwing money at education.