The politics of covetousness: Tim Rutten sez ‘Eat the rich’ [Darleen Click]

Yesterday, it was Matt Yglesia revealing his contempt for American principles of opportunity and property rights. He was, at least, honest about his desire to have the government come in and do the thievery according to his whims.

Tim Rutten follows the old Lefty playbook of trying to pretend that wealth is an unholy accident and “Republican” Teddy Roosevelt was any sort of constitutional conservative.

Of the several objectionable provisions included in the tax compromise that congressional Republicans extorted from the Obama administration, none is more noxious than the one that all but guts the estate tax.

Even the needless and unfair continuation of tax reductions for families making more than a quarter of a million dollars a year merely extends a benefit already enjoyed by affluent households. Estate tax cuts, by contrast, create a whole new windfall for those who already enjoy privileges and security undreamed of by the vast majority of Americans. [...]

Abolishing the estate tax has been a goal of some conservative Republicans since the 1940s, so it’s easy to forget that its modern champion was a president the GOP used to regard as among the greatest the party has produced — Theodore Roosevelt. Like many thoughtful Americans of his era, he believed the disproportionate accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few would make a mockery of our meritocracy and, ultimately, of our democracy. In 1910, he summed up those feelings. “We grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used,” Roosevelt said. “It is not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it to be gained only so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community…. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and … a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate.”

Rutten seems to think that just because Teddy won the presidency running on the GOP ticket it somehow masks the utter Leftist/collectivist/anti-property rights sentiments he expressed. Who is this “we” that gets to decide how much money the earner gets to keep? And not just by virtue of earning it, by virtue only if the earner uses it in the way the “we” dictates it should be used to “benefit the community” — also as defined by the “we”.

::::cough:::: Fascism ::::cough::::

It [death tax] clearly is a pillar of any rationally progressive tax system, and it is no accident that it’s under assault in what amounts to a new Gilded Age in which wealth is accumulating with ever-greater rapidity in a smaller and smaller number of hands. The hereditary advantage such unchecked concentration confers undermines our notions of equal opportunity and turns the American dream into little more than a genetic lottery.

Arguments that the existing estate tax frustrates initiative simply are nonsense. Has anybody noticed a shortage of rich people lately?

It’s also no mystery how such advantages are obtained. Again, Roosevelt’s appraisal of the first Gilded Age is sadly resonant. “The man of great wealth owes a particular obligation to the state,” he said, “because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government.”

Rutten first whines that wealth is being concentrated into fewer hands, followed immediately by another whine that there is no “shortage of rich people”. And the sneer that wealth is a “genetic lottery” is an outright lie. Approximately 80% of America’s millionaires – those affluent people who are getting “unnecessary and unfair” tax rates – are first generation affluent. Not to mention “about two-thirds of American millionaires are self-employed” and these businesses — from welding to farming — aren’t the stuff of proggie-stereotyped Wall Streeters lighting up cigars with $100 bills.

The Teddy quote is yet another bit of Leftist nonsense, demonstrating again the progressive inclination to love itself some Big Nannystate force to assuage its own raging jealousy at the talents and successes of others. Why would the “mere existence of government” be any more advantageous to “the rich” than to “the weak”? Or “the disabled”? Or to any individual that expects the government to secure their rights to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness?

The rich have no more a moral obligation to their fellow human beings than the middleclass or the poor — respect rights, act civilly, behave honestly and engage in acts of charity and kindness. The rich face greater opportunities of temptation and, if not of strong moral character, to indulge in bad behavior (ie gluttony) in greater excess than others “less rich”; just as the poor face greater opportunities to induge in bad behavior of accepting charity without gratitude and indulging in sloth. However, that is none of government’s concern (outside of criminal behavior). The Constitution was conceived as a compact of a moral and religious citizenry with a limited government that secured their rights and left them alone to deal with each other on a voluntary basis.

Rutten closes his screed with typical class warfare flair

In California, 12.4% of the workers are unemployed; in L.A. County, where bankruptcies have risen by 30% over the last year, nearly 13% are jobless. Of the 15 million Americans who are without work, 42% have been looking for a job for more than five months. An additional 9 million have been forced to accept part-time work, though they’d like full-time employment.

Those are the people the Republicans held hostage, so that the children of the rich might grow fatter still.

This Christmas season, Tim should acquaint himself with The 10th commandment.

Read more at Protein Wisdom