There is this weird notion that the Left has where anybody who had a hand in providing materials and resources to you shares in your success. After all, they reason, you couldn't have done it without the contribution of others. Nobody gets rich on their own, you see.
I've come to realize that the single pivot upon which you can determine the political stance of someone is their view of property rights. Is what you achieve, earn, and acquire in your life yours to own and manage, or is it collectively owned by the community and theirs to manage? In other words, do I have the right to reap the reward of my individual achievement, or is everything simply collective achievement?
So I'll start with the notion that I don't achieve anything without standing on the shoulders of others. That's a true statement, so - duh. My conception was not my own doing, my education was not initially my own doing, and my actions started out being what my parents and other adults dictated for me to do.
But as we get older, we're taught to become independent. To make our own choices, determine our own actions, and reap the reward or consequences of those choices and actions. The Left very much wants to retain their personal choices, whether it is to abort a baby or have sex with anyone they choose. Freedom of expression is oh so important to the Left. They not only crave independence, they demand it. And they should. They have, according to our nation's Constitution, the inalienable right to express themselves, and it should not be taken from them.
Now, if I were to try and claim for myself the words or artwork or baby of someone on the Left, in the name of collective achievement, they would launch every assault on me to take back what they achieved. I cannot claim "I have a dream!" for myself. I cannot share in Obama's Harvard degree. Robert Mapplethorpe's amazing photography? I would be forever haunted and shunned for trying to lay claim to his work.
The Left clearly recognizes individual achievement of their creative efforts. But somehow, that doesn't translate into recognition for the individual achievement in the creative effort of starting and building a company. Why? Because business creativity generates a lot more money than writing poetry.
So this notion of paying forward and insisting on the recognition of cumulative community achievement to pull money from the successful, it's just a rationalization. Whoopi Goldberg would no more let me employ her comedy skits than she would let me enjoy the money she makes from her movies and TV work.
To be clear here, no one in that Lefty bastion called Hollywood ever sees the work of the janitor equal to the work of the director in terms of payment. No movie could ever be made without the stuntman, and yet, he's not making Brad Pitt's wage. Collective achievement? Bah.
But somehow it's okay to presume that the business owner should divested of the earnings from her choices and assumed risks because she couldn't have achieved anything without the roads and bridges paid for by everyone.
Tell you what - the day that Michelle Obama lets me enjoy her husband's golf schedule and the White House chef is the day that I'll reconsider my position. But since that will never happen, I'll stick to the simple understanding that my life is the sum of my choices. My wages, my belongings, my property - these are my rewards for my choices. Any argument otherwise is a disingenuous effort by thieves. And heaven help you if you try to take from a thief...