Tax “The Rich”

Dear Editor:

Our basic freedoms are rooted in private property rights.  Without them it is impossible to be free. Absolutely every despot in history has denied all but a favored few the right to private property.  Our Constitution also guarantees equality before the law.  We are to be neither punished nor favored because of who we are.

“The Rich” are being targeted because they are a successful minority, 3 percent of our population. Their private property rights would be taken from them by elected officials, some who themselves have become rich while “in public service.” This is in stark contrast to “The Rich.” Most earned their wealth through a combination of education, working long hours and taking significant personal risks.

Before we endorse taxing “The Rich,” we must carefully consider the words of a Lutheran pastor in Nazi Germany who barely escaped execution for his very vocal opposition to the German government:

“First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up, because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me.”  Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945

If we think we are safe because we are not “The Rich,” Rev. Niemoller’s words suggest otherwise. If we are not all safe, none of us are.

David Greer
Cambridge

  • Bob

    Mr. Greer,

    Isn’t it an established fact that the majority of the “rich” inherited their wealth? Where is the hard work in that? The majoity of people that you describe lived during the start of the 20th century and not the 21st. Please cite an example of risk that they take in this market place?

    That being said, I understand the premise of your point and philosophy. I agree with you on that point but I think you can come with a better example than economics. You often use that incorrectly to try to make your point. You should find a different way to explain yourself because most people who know economics and economic history know that your points are flawed.

up arrow