This week, Rep. AOC introduced legislation termed "A Just Society" aimed "to combat one of the greatest threats to our country, our democracy, and our freedom: economic inequality."
And here you thought she was just another pretty face.
According to AOC's website, "These stark [economic] inequalities are being used by those in power to amplify fear and anger in our communities and further divide us. We must act boldly and swiftly to reverse the corrosive effects extreme inequality and poverty are having on our society. A Just Society aims to ensure that we are on a path towards shared prosperity for all. A just society provides a living wage, safe working conditions, and healthcare. A just society acknowledges the value of immigrants to our communities. A just society guarantees safe, comfortable, and affordable housing. By strengthening our social and economic foundations, we are preparing ourselves to embark on the journey to save our planet by rebuilding our economy and cultivate a just society." [Emphasis added.]
(For the record, this plan has been praised by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who tweeted: "It's going to take big, structural change to tackle poverty and inequality in the U.S., and @AOC's 'A Just Society' is just the type of bold, comprehensive thinking we'll need to get it done.")
As with all proposed Democratic legislation aimed at dismantling America as we know it, "A Just Society" is long on utopian propaganda but short on – wait for it – how it should be paid for. Darn those pesky details.
It's funny how obsessed rich Democrats are with poverty. Yet they ignore and absolutely refuse to credit the proven, time-tested, guaranteed way to escape poverty. This tactic has worked over and over by millions of people (including my mother, my paternal grandfather, and my three foreign-born sisters-in-law and their families).
Poverty can never be "eliminated." Even Jesus admitted the poor will always be with us. What the poor need is an opportunity to escape that poverty, to climb out of their economic position by themselves. Fortunately, we have that already in place in America – as long as the government keeps out of it.
Yes, you heard me. Government regulations strangle attempts to climb out of poverty. Government interferes with pure market-driven capitalism to stifle opportunity, and then blames capitalism as an "evil" system that "exploits the poor."
Government programs designed to eliminate poverty end up doing the reverse: They throw more people into poverty. The goals sound noble, but the results are disastrous. Just look at the statistics ever since President Johnson's War on Poverty began in 1964. The numbers don't lie, folks.
As investigative journalist John Stossel wrote in "Give Me a Break, "The left's vision of America 'that exploits the poor' is just a lie, promoted by politicians who thrive by telling people they are helpless 'victims.' In truth, opportunity abounds for those who are willing to work. The success of immigrants proves it. Children of immigrants typically earn more than the average American."
The family of two of my sisters-in-law arrived in this country with a suitcase apiece and nothing else, having fled poverty the likes of which most native-born Americans cannot begin to fathom. They are now middle-class home owners and business owners with college-educated children. Don't tell me this formula doesn't work.
In contrast, AOC's vision of eliminating poverty by redistributing money away from the rich is a time-tested recipe for economic disaster. Reducing poverty doesn't happen by making rich people poor. Reducing poverty happens by giving poor people the chance to become rich.
After all, once you take away all the money of rich people, where will more money come from? Rich people are motivated by money to make more money. Take away their money – either their current wealth, or any wealth they might create in the future – and surprise, they lose their motivation to make more money. That's doing nothing but killing the goose that laid the golden eggs.
Additionally, do you honestly think the rich are going to passively stand by and let 97.5 percent of their money be confiscated without doing anything about it? Of course not. They'll leave and go somewhere else (presumably a place where their job-creation strategies are appreciated), taking their money with them. I wouldn't blame them.
The only path to economic "equality," as Jim Huntzinger points out in Townhall, is tyranny; pure unadulterated tyranny. "Many complain that there is greater differential between the wealthiest and the least wealthy – but there must be in order to prosper without tyranny."
Huntzinger points out a rising tide lifts all boats. If that tide isn't raising all boats, it's because of one of two things: Either we're in an economic depression (in which case overall prosperity is decreasing for nearly everyone), or "a tyrannical, collectivist government is confiscating others' property and redistributing it to others as they see fit. And typically the first is a direct result of the second. The construct of the United States was established directly to eliminate this purpose – limited government for maximum freedom and liberty."
"You are either free or not free," observes Stossel. "Either you choose what you do with your money or government does."
Like so many other ills (sexism, racism, child abuse, etc.), activists have turned poverty into an industry. Activists far prefer poor people to stay poor, as it bolsters the need for more activism. "I found it hard to believe that a 'poverty industry' would want people kept dependent," writes Stossel, "but the more I watched the professional antipoverty activists work, the more plausible that seemed. They were overtly hostile to ideas that might diminish dependency." [Emphasis added.]
If an able-bodied person is enduring lifelong poverty – read that again: lifelong poverty, not temporary, not seasonal, not lasting a few years while getting back on their feet after a financial blow – then it's likely a government program is behind it. Believe me, poverty is a formidable motivator, and those not tangled in government dependency will do everything in their power to escape it. In America, they can.
If AOC and Elizabeth Warren and the other communists on the Democratic docket truly wanted economic equality, they'd get government programs out of the way and allow capitalism to flourish without bureaucratic red-tape or backroom sweetheart deals. Instead, they prefer to dismantle the system that cured poverty for millions, and build a system that would plunge hundreds of millions into the direst economic destitution.
Stop arguing we should "do something" about the economic inequality in America. Socialist countries illustrate very clearly what happens when you "do something."