Michelle Malkin had an interesting post over at Townhall this morning. It seem that the Occupy Whatever goons are in favor of a Robin Hood tax on corporations and bankers because, by golly, Robin Hood stole from the rich one percent and gave to the poor ninety-nine percent!! He's a hero to poor folks everywhere!!
“I’m after a man whom I want to destroy. He died many centuries ago, but until the last trace of him is wiped out of men’s minds, we will not have a decent world to live in.”
“He was the man who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor. Well, I’m the man who robs from the poor and gives to the rich – or, to be exact, the man who robs the thieving poor and gives back to the productive rich.”
“This is the horror which Robin Hood immortalized as an ideal of righteousness. It is said that he fought against the looting rulers and returned the loot to those who had been robbed, but that is not the meaning of the legend which has survived. He is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity. He is the man who became the symbol of the idea that need, not achievement, is the source of rights, that we don’t have to produce, only to want, that the earned does not belong to us, but the unearned does….Until men learn that of all human symbols, Robin Hood is the most immoral and the most contemptible, there will be no justice on earth and no way for mankind to survive.”
That is a quote from Ragnar Danneskjold, one of the characters of Atlas Shrugged, the book that only 1% of people who read it understand. I do think Ayn Rand put it the best. Did you notice the middle of the last paragraph? "He is remembered, not as a champion of property, but as a champion of need, not as a defender of the robbed, but as a provider of the poor. He is held to be the first man who assumed a halo of virtue by practicing charity with wealth which he did not own, by giving away goods which he had not produced, by making others pay for the luxury of his pity."
Why no, I don't have any Democrat politicians pop into my mind while thinking about that sentence, why did you ask?
But back to our reading-impaired friends at Occupy Whatever. From Michelle Malkin's Column:
October 29 is the eve of the G20 Leaders Summit in France, you see, and that's the date on which Adbusters wants its followers to "rise up and demand that our G20 leaders immediately impose a 1 percent ROBIN HOOD tax on all financial transactions and currency trades." The money, say longtime champions of the tax, would go to "fund crucial action against climate change."Oh yeah, we totally need a tax to deal with the non-existent climate change.
Say what? Panicked governments forked over trillions to rescue politically connected, basket-case banks, and the solution is ... punishing individual investors, creating less efficient capital markets, and spreading the wealth around to global-warming zealots and welfare-state overlords?
Rest assured, the text of the Robin Hood tax manifesto will be chanted in ignorant zombie unison -- using the "human microphone" method of call and drone -- in dingy occupier camps from NYC to San Francisco and every blue dot in between. Showcasing their economic illiteracy, the Occupiers remain clueless about the real-world consequences of their redistributionist claptrap. And they're ridiculously oblivious to the irony of adopting anti-tax crusader "Robin Hood" as their hero.
The demon millionaires and billionaires whom the Occupiers seek to punish would not be the only ones to bear the costs. Over time, the burden of the Robin Hood tax would shift. Rogoff observed: "Higher transactions taxes increase the cost of capital, ultimately lowering investment. With a lower capital stock, output would trend downward, reducing government revenues and substantially offsetting the direct gain from the tax. In the long run, wages would fall, and ordinary workers would end up bearing a significant share of the cost."
The original Robin Hood tales of the Middle Ages celebrated a renegade who rose up against property rights violations and taxation abuses. His archenemies were not private traders or bankers, but the local government tax collector, the Sheriff of Nottingham and the power-grabbing ruler, Prince John. Robin Hood, in other words, was far more tea party than flea party.And if the Occupy Whatever goons had actually understood what they read in Atlas Shrugged, they might have known that. Ayn Rand explained it pretty plainly.
And Ms. Malkin points out that since it's the modern politically correct, steal-from-the-greedy-rich-and-give-to-the-bum-poor Robin Hood that these people want,
In any case, if the Occupiers insist on celebrating outright theft from the haves in the name of the have-nots, perhaps they should stop complaining about the pickpockets and looters infesting their camps. Live by "social justice" nursery rhymes. Die by "social justice" crimes.I couldn't agree more. And the Occupy Whatever Goons all ought to be required to retake 9th Grade Lit.
Maybe this time, when reading Atlas Shrugged and 1984, they'll actually learn something.