There will always be people left behind in a competitive world. Eating the rich won’t solve it and the middle class will always suffer under the left. They’ll lie about it. There is something to be said for taking a step back and taking a look at what part of redistribution would keep people motivated to work and still benefit. Requiring 40 hours of work before coming to the rest of us. Those unable will be a small minority that can be taken care of on the most local level.
When the elites send our manufacturing overseas our prices go down. Can we pay more for stability purposes? The minimum wage costs jobs but will anyone work without one? Is it really that detrimental? Our issue is government getting in the way and the big stuff should be eliminated, like entire cabinet departments. More money circulating. If the minimum wage is to be eliminated it should be the last thing.
I cannot be more in disagreement with that statement, if it means legitimizing some element of redistribution of wealth.
If you do mean that, then I do disagree.
Forced redistribution of wealth, in any way, shape, or form, is corrupt and evil, root and branch.
The reason being is: No matter how it is defined, redistribution of wealth is never, ever enough. Ever. The only thing that would make adherents of redistribution of wealth satisfied is FULL redistribution of wealth, that is making those who are rich poor, and making those who are poor, rich.
And then, because there will never be enough rich to trade places with all the poor, the cycle will start again between those who remain poor and those made rich through forced redistribution of wealth.
Apart from wealth acquired via hard work and initiative, there is no form of wealth that can satisfy the dissatisfied, and no amount of wealth that will eliminate the reality of economic outcomes.