Why is government taking one person's property and giving to another considered "compassionate"?

Question

Conventional leftist wisdom says that if my property is taken via taxation and given to another, that is a "compassionate" act by government. I guess the thought is that the beneficiary of my property is getting some property of mine and that is a good thing and therefore compassionate. But what about me? The person whose property is taken against his will? How can that possibly be "compassionate" to me?

Isn't voluntary giving a key element of compassion? When I willingly make a donation to the many charities I give money to, I consider that compassionate. When government takes my property and gives to another, I don't see the compassion. What do you think?

Answer 1

Your logic and common sense will be lost on the "liberals" populating this "forum".

Answer 2

It's called theft. How do you like the deal where a local gov can take your property and sell it to someone that would develop it and pay the local gov more taxes. It's happening right now.

what you are talking about sounds just like the "reconstruction of the South" when the carpet bagers come South and stole our property. If anyone wants to talk compensation, how about pay back for that?

Answer 3

You're absolutely right, so stop paying taxes.

Then the government can't be "compassionate" with your money.

See how well that works out for you.

I do agree with you on one level.  I certainly don't like when the government is "compassionate" with my tax money going to Halliburton and Blackwater, or Exxon/Mobil, or Bear Sterns and Fannie and Freddie, or the "bridge to nowhere" in Mrs. Palin's Alaska.

I imagine that if Americans could directly earmark our tax dollars for the specific programs we wanted to fund, a lot of useless government programs and corporate theft/subsidies/tax breaks would vanish.

Answer 4

government can better tell.

Answer 5

Because two per cent own most American wealth as tens of millions are living in unnecessary poverty because of it.

Answer 6

Compassion has nothing to do with it.  The Government must first condemn the property indicating that is not fit for any ones use. Then the Government has to turn around and claim immanent domain. That the property belongs to the people.

Answer 7

The government was being very compassionate to you when they took it from the indians and gave it to you.

Answer 8

when the government takes my money and sends it over seas to a war that will profit the rich, that gets under my skin. If they're going to take my money anyway (which they will) then I would rather see it go to feed a hungry kid or buy books for a poor kid then see the fat cats at Haliburton and Enron use it to buy gold toilets. If thats compassion then yes I guess I'm compassionate.  

Answer 9

It seems to be a growing belief that the people who have more should be responsible for ensuring that others don't do without. It is all about making people feel good while creating more dependency on government. Just like Obama wants to take profits from Oil companies and give it back to the people. A percentage of that profit is in my 401k!

It's stealing, it's socialist and downright un-American.



It is very scary reading some of the answers on here. The media and socialists have been  working on this indoctrination for some time that we should abandon capitalism and let the government lead us to some sort of national utopia.

We have to do a better job educating our children so they don't grow up believing in this type of absurd politics.