Most Socialists are unhappy with their status in life and have resorted to blaming everyone else. ESPECIALLY those richer than themselves. Especially so when they finally figure out (and that’s not a given) that making other decisions throughout their lives would have been more optimal.
Very few of the countless inequalities people are likely to resent lend themselves to levelling, even when the attack on difference is as forthright as Mao’s Cultural Revolution. It is no use making everyone eat, dress, and work alike if one is still luckier in love than the other. The source of envy is the envious character, not some manageable handful out of a countless multitude of inequalities.
-Anthony de Jasay (The State)
They’re angry at themselves and take it out on others.
Could I have made other, better decisions? Of course – almost everyone could have. The difference between Socialists and me is that while I wouldn’t mind if I could go back and change some of them, I realize that this is the life *I* decided upon; I’m fairly content.
Not envious. Like Bruce Currie seems to be. After all, he thinks CEOs always steal their money from others instead of providing products that people voluntarily buy. He, then it also seems, wants to steal it back via taxing it all away from them. I have to think that because he never answers the question: “Whose money is it?” He’s envious that richer people use the tax laws to not pay the taxes he believes they should.
Else, he’d answer my very simple question. But he never does. It would give the game away if he did.
(H/T: Cafe Hayek)
