Income Redistribution

I've been listening to the pitch given by the major candidates for the President of the United States, and one issue has come up over the last week or so that is worth commenting about. Namely the idea of income redistribution.

As I understand it, when Obama misspoke and mentioned the term "income redistribution" (I have to say "misspoke" because none of Obama's ideas involve income redistribution, only discussions about how to collect taxes. I cannot see anyone who would get payments from the government who don't now.) McCain jumped on this term as a means of confusing people. That is, McCain, ignoring the facts mentioned above, accused Obama of income redistribution.

First, what is "income redistribution?" That is, is it income redistribution if the government collects taxes from one group to buy services from another to supply services to a third? For example, the government taxes all the people to pay to the poor to hire soldiers to conduct a war primarily for the benefit of the rich?

If the government won't do this, then the rich would be obliged to pay for the war themselves. They'd probably still hire the poor because they will work for less, which most people would view as simply payment for services, and not income redistribution.

One thing that I find interesting is that for a lot of people income redistribution is Okay if the distribution is from the poor to the rich. For example, the situation above. Poor and middle class people are taxed to wage a war for the rich. The poor, who have nothing to steal, are taxed to hire police to protect the wealthy from the poor.

The most recent example of income redistribution is the $850,000,000,000 bailout of Wall Street. That is, poor people, who have not retirement fund, and no stocks, are taxed to bail out those businesses who tried to take advantage of the poor through sub prime loans. The wealthy get everything the poor own, and a huge payment from the government as well. If that's not income redistribution, what is?

Instead, people focus on "welfare programs" which are designed to help poor people over the rough spots in life. These programs cost nothing compared to the money the United States spends to support the military-industrial complex.

Being a Christian, I am have to take the teachings in the Bible into account. For example, Matt 19:21 "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me." Luke 14:12-14 "Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbours; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompence be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind: And thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just." Matt 6:15 "But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses." That is, we are to mindful of the plight of the poor, to the point of meeting their needs.

Given this, I would assume that those people who believe the Bible to be true must be in favor of income redistribution from the rich to the poor. But then, I've been wrong before - too often "believe in the Bible" means believe in those portions of the Bible which supports the status quo, even if it is an abomination.

I would also note the need for income redistribution for economic reasons. That is, the stock market, company CEO's, recipients of large inheritances, etc. to not generate goods and services for the money they receive. Yet in the United States people have decided these are the very people who get the bulk of the money, and the break on the taxes. Those people who actually produce the goods and services are notoriously underpaid (except for some movie stars and some sports heroes). Why should people work if they have no hope for a reward, and, really, no hope for self survival?

Money is a tool. It is a human invention, and humans can do with it as they will. It is intended to distribute goods and services easily, and, to give people an incentive to create goods and services. Therefore, if redistributing income, however this is accomplished, furthers these goals, then it is good, and should be considered.