One of the central themes of Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign was his response to “You didn’t build that.” Romney’s argument, when stripped down to its essence, was that the hard work and brilliance of American businessmen were responsible for their (and the nation’s) prosperity, and it was unjust to take their hard-earned rewards away from them.
Is it a violation of natural justice to tax the wealthy on their earnings and to give the money to the less fortunate? Of the arguments made against redistribution, this one is the least persuasive, because:
- The wealthy did not create themselves, in a biological sense;
- Nor did they educate themselves;
- Nor did they create the physical, social, legal, and political climate in which their businesses were permitted to thrive. As I’ve noted many times, all that brilliance and hard work goes to naught if you live in South Sudan;
- The wealthy rely more heavily on the legal system than poor people do to defend their assets and rights, so it is fair for them to pay more for it;
- A large percentage of the assets owned by the wealthy were not created or earned by themselves; and
- Someone has to pay for government, and you can’t get money from people who don’t have any.
Obama was right; individual initiative plays a part in the creation and growing of business, but it can’t and doesn’t happen outside of a nurturing environment for which all of us, not just the wealthy, are responsible. Redistribution to prop up and improve that environment is not, therefore, unjust.