Sunday, February 17, 2019

What's Wrong With Being Rich?

A good thing.

There's a growing liberal mentality in America that it's evil to be rich.

I was recently talking with one of our nation’s youth (19 years old) when the subject of politics came up, that dreaded word which has sparked many heated debates, especially lately. We were about ten seconds into the conversation when he quickly said, “I don’t like that Romney guy.”

I said, “Really, why not?”

“Because he’s rich.”

Taken back a little, I then asked, “What’s wrong with being rich? Wouldn’t you like to be rich someday?”

Thinking, “Well…ya’ll.”

“Then, why don’t you like Mitt Romney?”

“Because he was given his money, his daddy started him off in business. He didn’t make it on his own.”

I paused and thought for a few moments, thinking of the best way to handle this inexperienced youth. “I then patted him on his back saying, “Okay, if I was wealthy and you were my son and I gave you the means to start a business which I believed would be successful, what would you do, refuse my generosity, or look at it as a blessing and use my dollars to help create many more? And oh, by the way, help employ others in the process.”

Looking a bit puzzled, he said, “But, what about those who don’t have rich daddy’s?”

I firmly looked at him and said, “Mitt Romney’s father wasn’t always rich. He started off with nothing just like those you’re talking about, then passed his money along to his family. What’s wrong with that?”

Starting at the ground he mumbled, “I see your point; I guess I’m just jealous.”

I looked at him again, “There’s no reason to be jealous, just be more like Mitt’s dad, and strive to make your own wealth so your kids can be successful as well someday. Then, everybody wins. And by the way, Mitt Romney made his money because of his entrepreneurial abilities, not just because his father helped him some.”

He smiled, “I see it now.”

This is the problem with so much of our country today; it’s poor against rich, employee railing against employer, government vs. private worker. It seems as though anyone who has more than the other is the bad guy, the target, the one in the crosshairs, the man or woman needed to be taken down. It’s a mentality which goes against everything our country was founded on: free enterprise, capitalism, equal opportunity, and the real Hope and Change we desperately need to hold onto.

Right now, the number of people dependent on government support is staggering, and it’s getting worse everyday. Granted many, many are truly deserving of help: the elderly, the disabled, our wounded veterans just to name a few. They aren’t victims, just ones who have no other choice. But, the problem comes when there are those who abuse the system, having given into the notion that the government owes them, the rich owe them, the privileged owe them just because they happen to be born with plentiful means. And that those with more should be demanded to give and give, therefore, the phrase, “The Fundamental Distribution of Wealth” comes into play as so proudly shouted by our current President. This idea is severely flawed, and is what happens when the creation of a nanny state begins to form—a society where people don’t dare vote for anything other than a government taking almost everything they make in return for meager basic necessities. This goes against the abundance that God wants for your life.

All over the world poverty exists. A lot of it is because of dictatorships, socialist’s states, and leaders who only serve to fill their pockets and take from the people. America was formed as an alternative; a place where anyone can come across our shores and feel free to exercise their rights as individual human beings; to create, to earn, to develop and grow, not to be totally dependent on something like government. But, the Great War against anything rich began when Obama was elected.

Right now, we have leaders whose belief goes against the American way. They want the masses to be dependent on government, to rally against the rich, to serve as poster children for big government and the changing of American society. They want only a few to sit at the golden table of privilege. They are the ones the American Voter needs to deny, the wealth distributors, not the job creators.

Like many, whenever I see someone racing by in a new Ferrari, living in a mega-mansion, or flying off in a private jet to an exotic destination, my human side rises up. I get a little envious, and wish I could trade seats with them if only for a short while. But, here’s the reality: Someone, somewhere, during some period in history caused that to happen. They created, made, developed, and used their God-given will and talents to propel them above. They took risks, worked hard, and sought out opportunity. Those rewards we all seek didn’t just occur, didn’t just materialize out of thin air. They were earned and sweated for by those who believe in the entrepreneurial spirit, not politicians demanding it from others.

One of the greatest feelings we can experience is creation--to make something out of nothing and experience the rewards. It triggers enormous benefits to our dignity, self respect, confidence, and self-worth. It gives us power over a depressed existence, allowing us to rise above all that is draining.

When earned and used well, money is a wonderful thing.

About the Writer

Randy Mitchell is a blogger on lifestyle, writing and relationship topics and is a published author of inspirational romance. His first novel "Sons In The Clouds" is available in paperback on Amazon. To read more about Randy, visit
Want to write articles too? Sign up & become a writer!

10 comments on What's Wrong With Being Rich?

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By Agit8r on October 02, 2012 at 10:53 am

It's absurd to assume that a criticism of the system of hereditary wealth is unique to those who support big government.

"legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let their subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of property of every kind therefore to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other relations in equal degree is a politic measure, and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." -- Thomas Jefferson; from letter to James Madison (Oct. 28, 1785)

The great object should be to combat the evil: 1. By establishing a political equality among all; 2. By witholding unnecessary opportunities from a few to increase the inequality of property by an immoderate, and especially an unmerited, accumulation of riches; 3. By the silent operation of laws which, without violating the rights of property, reduce extreme wealth towards a state of mediocrity and raise extreme indigence towards a state of comfort; 4. By abstaining from measures which operate differently on different interests, and particularly such as favor one interest at the expense of another; 5. By making one party a check on the other so far as the existence of parties cannot be prevented nor their views accommodated. If this is not the language of reason, it is that of republicanism."-- James Madison; from 'Parties' (1792)
 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 1
By jaybetee on October 02, 2012 at 01:39 pm

There is nothing wrong with being rich. I started a web design company and am working hard to make it successful so I can be rich. The issue in America I believe is that the rich are getting richer while their employees are getting poorer, seeing benefits cut, and struggling to maintiain their household imcome at a level where they can affor basic necessities. The problem I have with Romney and the rest of the GOP is that they are the party that is trying to do away with unions and organizations that help workers earn a fair wage. So, no there's nothing wrong with being rich. There is a problem when you are getting rich while your employees can't afford to put food on the table or pay rent for a small apartment.

Also, there is no Great War on the rich, and it did not start when Obama was elected. I think maybe the 60's is when the counter culture started questioning the value we, as a society, placed on wealth and wondered if there weren't better alternatives. I despise the conservative efforts to paint liberals as communists or socialists that despise wealth. In fact, I think many liberals are promoting concious capitalism where individual wealth is balanced with responsible business practices that support and grow a thriving middle class. Conservatives can rail all they want against liberal fiscal policies, but all you have to do is look at the numbers to see the country has seen a greater return on our investments, a huge reduction in debt and millions more jobs created under Democratic leadership.

When it's all said and done conservative policies make the rich richer and leave the rest of the population to struggle. It removes the saftey nets that help people endure hard times and land on their feet, it removes the support for education that helps people get the skills they need to become successful business people, and it gives all the advantages to those who already have the advantage.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By TonyBerkman on October 02, 2012 at 07:25 pm

Im not sure the owners of companies necessarily make more than their employees. Typically a founder will start a company and for the first few years and probably more the owner works hard and more hours than his or her employees and typically makes far less money. 9 out of 10 companies fail within a few years and the one's that makes it only a small % make a a great profit. Many of the 1 out of 10 just keep plodding along and the owners make a small salary if any. The employees however continue to be protected by minimum wage laws and other governmental programs. For the companies that make it big, such as Apple, Microsoft, etc. you will find that the founders have made large sums of cash. However this is looking at a tiny percentage of founders. So it is true that the rich are very rich and make up a small % of the population. They deserve to be since they have beaten the odds and added more value to this economy than most of us could ever dream about. So why should they be penalized? The shouldn't. These people should be rewarded and encourage to continue doing what they are best at .. and that is creating enterprises such as Apple, Microsoft, Google that make America a thriving nation. It is when government starts to interfere with this model that we enter into extremely dangerous territorty. It is when our brightest minds will start to look for countries that encourage innovation and entrpeneurship. When Clinton did well in office it was during the dot com boom and the country was flowing in cash. It's the reason federal and state coffers filled up and we eliminated the deficit. We are now at a time when we can give up and hope that government provides sufficient programs for us or we can understand that it is up to us to make the change and make the difference. Government is needed to provide for those who truly cannot provide for themselves. The rest of us have a responsibility to contribute our skills and services so that we do not take from the government. And those who take the largest risk and succeed should be entitled to enjoy the fruits of their success and not have their success sucked away and redistributed the rest of us.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Randy Mitchell on October 03, 2012 at 10:37 am

Thanks for all your comments here.

Jaybetee, conservative policies are aimed at promoting businesses which turns into jobs. Unions have their place (I've was a member once) but one of the reasons so many companies use overseas labor is union membership has priced themselves out of the market. I'm all for representation, but there must be a balance between what a company (and state government) can actually afford, and what it can't. And with state government's going broke right and left because of their employees inflated demands, that speaks for itself.

Obama's entire career has rallied against the rich. He's a man who is all about wealth redistribution and big government. It's who he is. Liberal fiscal policies? Looking at their numbers, I believe a 4 trillion dollar increase in the national debt, continued high unemployment numbers, $5 a gallon gas, and businesses afraid to hire until Obama's gone speaks for itself. VP Biden himself said recently that the middle class has taken it the hardest during the past four years. And this is Obama's right hand man. Not one minority group, business, or middle class person has benefited with Obama.

Tony, thank you as well. It's true, business owners are oftentimes the least paid because of the risks, long hours, and oftentimes years spent re-investing their profits just to keep things going. When one really thrives like an Apple or Google, that didn't happen overnight. Apple was nearly bankrupt before Jobs performed his wizardy and the management deserve their rewards. The rich don't get rich by using government to help them. They become rich by taking risks, gritting their teeth while trying to make payroll, and targeting a market for their products and services.

America was founded on entrepreneurship, not government interference. And I think it should remain that way. Every word you said here is the truth.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Inmyredhead on October 06, 2012 at 02:12 am

A complete, 'Amen to that!'

Every time this comes up, I always put this out there:

Ok, so you don't like Romney because he's 'rich'? Okay...

Obama, (who has never owned a business) is worth 10 million dollars. Romney (who has been a business man and owner most of his adult life) is worth 100 million. So what? When did multimillionaire status become 'not rich'?

Rich is rich.

And I also always ask... if you ran a business, would you want to stay just above water or would you try to make real profit? Wouldn't you want to succeed? Do you consider anyone who is not rich, a real success? Just get honest and realistic and stop hating on those who have.

In my neck of the woods, the richest neighborhoods are mostly populated by liberals who claim to hate money. Funny, I don't see them living non rich in order to be fair and redistribute their incomes equally. Im not saying all and everyone, always and everytime everywhere. I hate blanket statements like that. So please people stop being hypocrites. Give it almost ALL away, or admit... the majority of us live to be successful and wouldn't snub it if it were handed to us in any way. And what is wrong with that? If you don't like opportunity and advantage there are plenty of countries where they will work to keep you down and the only people you have to be jealous of will be the Czars and Kings.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Randy Mitchell on October 07, 2012 at 10:34 am

Inmyedhead, I couldn't agee more. The hypocrisy among liberals is really funny. They rally against the rich at every turn, yet, they would love to trade places if given the chance.

It's only a political talking point which the Obama campaign has desperately tried to use--class warfare at its finest.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 2
By Steven Matherly on November 04, 2012 at 10:47 am

The problem with being rich is that the way one gets to be rich is by funneling the wealth of others into one's own pockets.

This is accomplished when someone "works for you". That person "agrees" to give his/her labor for a given period of time and you pay them a wage. The problem with this is that the reason this person has to work for you is be they have no alternative. The land is all in private hands, they aren't allowed to sleep just anywhere they want, they can't hunt or fish without paying for the right. The commons has been closed and the peasants forced off the land. The natural world has been privatized by force of arms over the generations. If you have the money or the credit to borrow the money to start a business you are the beneficiary of generations of accumulated wealth and privilege.

Sure, once you get a business going, the owner works hard. But not 1,000 times harder so as to deserve 1,000 times more money. Sure the owner might be smarter than the worker and took advantage of the chances he was given but that doesn't mean he has the right to enslave others. I say enslave because what else do you call it when a worker has no recourse but to exchange his labor for barely enough to survive to work another day or the owner.

The hardest working people in the world are poor people. Working three jobs at minimum wage isn't uncommon. This vilifying of the poor is only the rich trying to distract us from the fact that they (as a class, as a group, and over generations) have forcibly created a world where many people have no choice but to work for someone else and at starvation wages.

Try being a "self-made man" without some workers whose "excess labor value" you can skim off and put in you pocket.

The reason the poor hate the rich is because the rich use their wealth to buy the political system and make it work for their interests.

The entire Capitalist system is based on "buy low, sell high". Buy cheap cocoa and you can make chocolate at a profit. But if workers who pick the cocoa owned their own land (and hadn't been colonized and enslaved) the inputs would be a lot more expensive.

What you call socialism was really state capitalism (China, Soviet Union).

The reason the U.S. hates Chavez so much is he is actually distributing the oil wealth of his nation to the people and creating an alternative to capitalism - he was just re-elected and has survived two coup attempts so far.

You can't be rich in a capitaist society without taking unfair advantage of other people.

The very nature of wealth is exploitative. Those being exploited don't appreciate it. That's why they hate the rich.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Randy Mitchell on November 04, 2012 at 02:24 pm

Mr. Matherly, your comments are absolutely ridiculous. What you call being "enslaved," business owners call giving others a chance to earn so they can provides homes and food their families. I know of no business owners who look upon their employess as "slaves," and if one feels this way they can look for employment elsewhere. Chavez? Really? He's a dictator whose people have a horrible standard of living as a whole. He gets rich off of oil money while his people starve in the streets. His elections are criminally forced his way.

I've done both, worked for others and owned my own businesses, and the first helped pay for starting the latter. I never came from wealth, looked for any government handouts, and had very little credit when I started--only the will and drive to succeed along with some business ideas. Tell your theories on how to become a business owner to the millions of immigrants who came to this country with literally nothing and made themselves successful with only ideas and determination.

If you want to know what's it like to feel "enslaved," I'd suggest you go live in Venezuela, Cuba, Red China, or Communist Korea etc, where the rich really do rule the people. These are the lands where people truly are "enslaved."

Americans enjoy the highest standard of living of any country in the world and we didn't get this way by being "enslaved." Those days were over a long time ago.

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By killedbycapitalism on November 30, 2012 at 01:06 pm

I'm willing to bet that almost all rich people (if not ALL) are undeserving of their wealth in God's eyes, because they only "earned" it due to being born into privilege and/or simply getting lucky, at the expense of the poor millions who are starving and dying of preventable/curable diseases. It is impossible to argue that the rich work 1000 times (or even 10 times) harder than the average poor person; in fact, I'm willing to bet the the average poor person actually works harder than a majority of rich people but just didn't have a fraction of the fortuitous circumstances that the rich people had.

Therefore, I'm also willing to bet that God would rather have rich people give >95% of their money to help save lives than use it to buy 16 mansions and 5 private jets. Would you bet your life that I am wrong about all of this, according to God? If not, please take down your Capitalist article because you are corrupting youth in the name of greed, and you seem to be proud of it!

 Report abuse

Log In To Vote   Score: 0
By Atalia88 on June 07, 2014 at 02:40 am

I agree with that discussion pozycjonowanie stron

 Report abuse

Add A Comment!

Click here to signup or login.

Rate This Article

Your vote matters to us