Henry Hazlitt Quotes

Democratic socialism means that we must create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy.

The Tenth Commandment sends a message to socialists, to egalitarians, to people obsessed with fairness, to American presidential candidates in the year 2000 - to everyone who believes that wealth should be redistributed. And that message is clear and concise: Go to Hell.

I actually believe in redistribution (of wealth)

My premise is not to tax to destroy the wealth of the wealthy; it's to increase the wealth of the bottom and the middle class.

In a morally adjusted economy ... the rich should not get richer if the poor get poorer.

For the good of Spain, I should like there to be rather fewer rich people and rather fewer poor.

It's not class warfare to talk about fairness.

Worrying about the poor is one thing. To contend that equality is necessary for growth is an altogether different and more radical idea.

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 pushes the masses into the camp of socialism is, even more than the illusion that socialism will make them richer, the expectation that it will curb all those who are better than they themselves are.

There are social democrats and others who are marching more in the direction of equality, whether you call them socialists or communists... Capitalism has only hurt Latin America.

Relief, or redistribution of income, voluntary or coerced, is never the true solution of poverty, but at best a makeshift, which may mask the disease and mitigate the pain, but provides no basic cure.

Good Old Socialism ... Raping The Pocketbooks Of The Rich To Give To The Poor.

Give your goods to the poor: Christ. Property is theft - as long as it's not mine: Marx .

This is not to say that the government should confiscate from the "haves" and bestow upon the "have-nots", beyond the requirements of a compassionate welfare program to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. Far from it. But it is to say that our duty is to foster a strong, vibrant wealth-producing economy which operates in such a way that new additions to wealth accrue to those who presently have little or no ownership stake in their country.

Socialism is about claims of justice, and it is also about money: about wealth, income, physical and financial capital. It is an ideology based on allocating economic resources. It may try to achieve that goal by nationalizing assets, by command-and-control regulation, or by taxation and redistribution.

Conservatives believe the economy functions better if the rich have more money and everyone else has less. But they're wrong. It's just the opposite.

I wish the city of San Francisco, bastion of liberalism, were more innovative when it comes to how to spread the wealth.

I say I don't need a tax cut. It will not do me any more good. I can't buy more, I can't eat more, I can't do more, and I want it distributed among the ordinary people who work every day.

I think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.

We are privileged. There are poor people out there. We must to do something to make them privileged.

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.

We need to have the social investments by which to quote unquote distribute some of that wealth.