Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Wealth: Division vs Multiplication

Dr. Adrian Pierce Rogers (September 12, 1931 – November 15, 2005) of Love Worth Finding Ministries, Pastor Emeritus of Bellevue Baptist Church.

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that, my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."

The same explained with a more practical,and simple example:

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had once failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on the socialism plan".

All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.

As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.

Could not be any simpler than that.

Sources: Mail forward, Scott’s Morning Brew

4 comments:

Siraj said...

"Socialism" and its brother "Communism" are some of the most evil religions invented by man..
They have caused millions of deaths due to mass shootings falsely labelled "enemies of the people ", millions to die due to starvation and millions more to live in poverty and fear.
I wish that my well-meaning, left-leaning countrymen that they understand this.
I want to repeat .. These ideologies are not political or economic systems but they are RELIGIONS.. Why? Because they have no evidence to back them up.. in fact the evidence points that they fail miserably..

Ganesh said...

@ Siraj,
Strong views there. I agree and disagree.

Agree because a lot of evidence as you pointed out. Disagree because it had a socially relevant cause, at a socially relevant era.

But times have changed. The cause is abused now (many use it as an excuse) and we are in a progressive era.

Just a matter of time.. either to understand or to fail!

Siraj said...

I have strong views because when I think of the progress our country could have achieved if we were not following these ideologies, I feel so bad.

"socially relevant cause, at a socially relevant era."-- Can you please explain or give me an example..

I personally do not think that the tenets of these collectivist religions apply in ANY era..

Ganesh said...

The progress of the country? But isn't the so called socialist ideology confined to a few (i mean a very few) pockets in the country?

When i said a socially relevant cause in a socially relevant era, i meant this: there was a time (not long ago, and not yet completely eradicated) when a select few individuals (not because they earned it, they stole and inherited) could control the destiny of a lot. I mean in many contexts people were oppressed. Socially, educationally and monetarily a large section of the society was at a huge disadvantage. The reason - pedigree and inherited social status. Socialistic ideologies had relevance in that era (may be a century back till may be even today, i don't know). Today relevance is only limited. And our democracy has matured enough to take up that cause.

But rather than understanding the reality the flag bearers of socialistic ideologies have become corrupt and stereotyped. Blinded by a false sense of authority and power, they are digging their graves at a furious pace. The leaders are busy filling their pockets and followers are taken for grand ride.

But frankly, i don't think i understood how you equated today's socialism with religion. Religion has always been strong. But today's socialism is almost dead!!