Jean-Paul Marat Quotes

I think the socialist movement, by removing many, many people from grinding stagnation and poverty and overwork, does enable people not just to lead better lives but to be better people.

Imagine what would happen if the government were to take the wealth of 200,000 of India's richest people and redistribute it amongst 2 million of India's poorest? We would hear a lot about socialist appropriation and the death of democracy. Why should taking from the rich be called appropriation and taking from the poor be called development?

What does 'economic justice' mean, except that you want something that someone else produced, without having to produce anything yourself in return?

The Democrats tell all the poor people and all of the middle class that they're only where they are 'cause the rich have cheated them, exploited them, or stolen all their money. The way they're gonna make it equal is to take from those people who have just won life's lottery, the premise being that the poor and the rich and the middle class are gonna get the money.

Political Freedom without economic equality is a pretense, a fraud, a lie; and the workers want no lying.

We don't need to bring down the rich folk to help the poor.

The thing about Occupy is that the sentiment the movement embodies is timeless: Don't be greedy, share.

You'll notice that for many progressives, taking from the rich is not simply a necessity of budgeting but a moral imperative and a tool to institute fairness that capitalism supposedly hasn't.

Share the Wealth

It's not class warfare to talk about fairness.

Instead of favoring the wealthy, Civil Government ought carefully to protect the poor laborious and industrious Part of Mankind.

We have to find a way to make the aspects of capitalism that serve wealthier people serve poorer people as well.

We must put an end to both economic freeloading and economic exploitation in America. There must be no place for parasites who draw their sustenance from society without giving anything in return.

I am going to attack income inequality and I think I have a pretty good plan to do so. I don't just tell you what I'm against. I tell you what I'm for and how I would do it.

The greed of the billionaire class has got to end and we are going to end it for them.

I'm no communist.I'm a tax cutting Conservative. But I want a capitalism that is fairer to forgotten people.

The welfare state is institutionalized crime - 'organized plunder,' as the French economist Frederic Bastiat called it. It systematizes what is intrinsically wrong: forcing some people to support others. The Democrats favor the indefinite expansion of the welfare state, perpetually increasing the ratio of force to freedom in society.

For the Sanders supporters, there's a thought that the people who are well off are doing really great, and the system is systematically unfair, and that's a very deeply felt and serious objection to the current situation.

During a campaign speech in Ohio, President Obama said, 'I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth'. So to be fair, he wants to take your silverware and spread it around.

If you really want to end income inequality, I've got the way to fix it. People who don't work shouldn't get any income.

A holistic solution to income inequality is going to take a lot of work, but every time you prove that one of the strands is achievable and that it has a positive impact on people's lives you take another step towards proving the bigger theory of the case.

The only way to have a better world and end poverty is by closing the gap between the top and the bottom.

We're asking those who have done well to do a little more for the people who need it.

There is a legitimate concern about wealth distribution in the United States, but the answer is not to scapegoat any individual who makes over $200,000 per year and to try to sell the fraud that the government can equitably take the money of those who have earned it and give it to those who haven't.

I think the idea that giant profitable corporations should pay their workers enough so that they don't need food stamps - since when is that left-wing? How did that become 'leftie?' That doesn't seem leftie to me. That seems common sense.