Rush Limbaugh Quotes

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.

It is amazing how many of the intelligentsia call it "greed" to want to keep what you have earned, but not greed to want to take away what somebody else has earned, and let politicians use it to buy votes.

It's not class warfare to talk about fairness.

What I have proposed would be paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy, because they have made all the gains in the economy.

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?

You campaigned against rich people and you got enough envy whipped up in the country and you're gonna get 'em. You're gonna stick it to those rich people. But guess what? You may not get anymore revenue. You may not get anymore economic growth. But you can say, 'I stuck it to the rich people.'

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

'Egalitarians' who complain about inequality view the wealth of the wealthiest as bad in itself: it disfigures society. They would enact a wealth tax to extirpate the offending wealth.

I don't believe in trickle-down economics. I don't think that people who have the most are inclined to share it, generally.

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

The middle class has no more to give. The poor have nothing. Let's get it from those who've got it.

The distribution of wealth is just as important as its creation.

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

The modern welfare state, highly touted as soaking the rich to subsidize the poor, does no such thing. In fact, soaking the rich would have disastrous effects, not just for the rich but for the poor and middle classes themselves. For it is the rich who provide a proportionately greater amount of saving, investment capital, entrepreneurial foresight, and financing of technological innovation that has brought the Unites States to by far the highest standard of living - for the mass of the people - of any country in history.

We've become a culture where earning money doesn't entitle you to it, but wanting it does. That is the essence of redistribution.

You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer.

Class warfare or soaking the so-called rich may make for good populist demagoguery and serve the political ends of the governing masterminds, but it does nothing to solve the grave realities of the federal government's insatiable appetite for spending and its inability to reform itself.

You need to look at inequality as a typical condition of modern society.

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

Most of the gains in the last years since the Great Recession have gone to the very top. So we are going to have the wealthy pay their fair share. We're going to have corporations make a contribution greater than they are now to America.

The distribution of wealth is not determined by nature. It is determined by policy.

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.

Democrats don't resent the rich on behalf of the poor. They resent the rich on behalf of the government.

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