Should the Wealth in America be Redistributed?

There is great concern throughout the United States concerning the inequality of the distribution of wealth. One study shows that the top 20% of the wealthiest individuals in America controls 80% of the nations wealth. It has been argued that the Republicans are to blame for this result because of their partiality to taxing the rich. While Republicans argue against socialistic reforms, they are in essence committing a socialistic act by refusing to impose higher taxes on the rich. As a result, the bulk of the wealth remains with the top 20% of the wealthiest individuals in America. Today there are people protesting on Wall Street in hopes of ending the greed of executives, in hopes of helping the poor, and in hopes of having the wealth of our nation redistributed.

While it is alarming that there is such a great disparity in the distribution of wealth amongst our nation, I do not believe that redistribution of wealth is the answer. Redistribution of wealth will not encourage the poor to aspire to work nor will it eliminate the current welfare system. It is also very unfair to take money earned from individuals who were financially savvy, ambitious, hardworking, or lucky enough to be the descendants of individuals who were financially savvy, ambitious or hardworking, and distribute to others. The wealthy individuals in America donate money to the charitable organizations in an effort to help the poor, feed the homeless, provide medication, and many more. Is it really fair to demand that they start distributing their wealth so that everyone can be on the same level financially?

Do you remember the story of the three little pigs? Lets use them as an example. Now lets assume that the three little pigs were each given the same amount of money and were told to use it to build a home so that they would not be eaten by the big bad wolf. One built his house out of straw, the other out of wood, and the other out of bricks. When the wolf came, only one house was sturdy enough to withstand his huffing and puffing, the house made of bricks. So the third little pig was the wisest of the three. Now because he was wise enough to build a house that will last, his children will likely inherit that house. Now he allowed the other two little pigs to dwell in the house with him so that they would not get eaten by the wolf. Should he do more? Under redistribution of wealth, he would be forced to give a share of his home to the other two little pigs that were afforded the same opportunity to build a similar home, but chose a cheaper alternative due to either laziness or lack of aptitude. Is that really fair? This example shows that even when you give the same amount of money to individuals, if you do not control how and where the money is spent, there are some who will squander their wealth away, and others who will make wise investment decisions. As a result, disparity in wealth will always exist, and redistribution of wealth will not work in the United States. It will not cure our economic problems.

I believe that the United States is a place where the opportunities are limitless. However, many Americans have become dependent on a welfare system, and not enough on a system that should be based on capitalism. The focus of the United States government should be focused on how can the economy be stimulated in order to create jobs? Not in order to reduce the disparity in wealth. Americans must also become dedicated to learning and obtaining the skills for the jobs that are actually on demand. These are the jobs that American companies hire foreigners to perform because there are few Americans who possess the knowledge and skill to perform. The real beauty about America is that if you cannot find a job, it is really easy to create one of your own, and become your own boss. The question is are you willing to take that risk and invest in yourself, rather than wait around for others to invest in you?