Appeared in February 23, 2011 Morgan County Citizen
An odd example is used to justify wealth redistribution. A comparison is drawn between football and baseball that concludes that because the NFL employs revenue sharing this makes it “democratic = fair”. Democracy and fairness have nothing to do with each other. A majority can vote for unfair things. I think the author’s intent is to perform political slight of hand… if we accept democracy is “good” then modifying our economy to be more “fair” must be “good” as well. In point of fact MLB also has a revenue sharing model and in 2009 had total revenue of $6.6 billion whereas the NFL had $9 billion. The author presents it as though this difference is solely from MLB lacking revenue sharing in order to justify the notion that if “redistribution works here, then it will work everywhere”. The NFL and MLB have CHOSEN to follow that model because it benefits them financially. When the government does it, we have no choice. We do not see the unseen harm. We do not see what would have been bought or built, but wasn’t.
Government “investment” is simply redistribution of wealth. The redistribution may be for a noble cause but without consent it is morally wrong (theft). I agree that disadvantaged children do need help. But government is not the answer. Private charities do an incredible job helping so many in spite of the government not because of it. Think what they could do with less government.