Go ahead, try to tax the unrealized stock gains of billionaires, a wealth tax of questionable constitutionality. Or wear a “Tax the Rich” dress with the same font as a Chick-fil-A takeout bag to a gala for millionaires and billionaires. Or expand the idea of “infrastructure” to include social giveaways—free stuff for all. But what do progressives get out of it?
They must know that massive wealth redistribution and public spending crush the economy if they have ever studied the failures of Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society or Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal. Progressives often invoke Europe as an economic model knowing full well that the U.S. outstrips almost all European countries in economic output per capita—15% higher than Germany’s, 43% higher than France’s.
Surely former law professor Elizabeth Warren has studied enough history—I mean, Harvard, right?—to understand the fallacy of her socialist leanings. Her government-controls-everything policies usually lead to Venezuela-style ruin. Why pursue these policies? What is the end game? Here are nine answers.
The obvious yet unsatisfying answer is to gain and then stay in power—to buy votes. That is understandable, but then why take it to the extreme, like they did with ObamaCare, which anyone with a revenue-vs.-expense spreadsheet knew would fail?
A better explanation is the shakedown theory. Even Honest Abe Lincoln’s administration was rife with patronage. The goal of single-payer healthcare recalls the opening scene from “The Godfather” when Don Corleone meets with a favor-currying constituent. Bonasera wants justice for an assault on his daughter. Now imagine he’s asking his senator for permission to have gallbladder surgery.
Then there is the “noblesse oblige” theory that the privileged should use government to improve the lives of the less privileged. Hooey, but everything sounds smart in French.
