“Fair share?”

The following meme is being widely circulated by supporters of Bernie Sanders.  Yet, none has be able, or willing, to explain, much less discuss, the ramifications of that for which they clamor.  They answer only with some simplistic demands about “fair share.”

12821624_10153946779789522_7902061320566740337_nI hear this often from proponents of “democratic socialism,” but am puzzled by the meaning.  Since it is often used in conjunction with a person’s economic status, I presume it is mainly about wealth, or lack thereof.  So my question: What is a fair share, and how is that determined?

More pointedly: At what level does accumulating wealth become greed as opposed to satisfying one’s need?  By what metric is a person’s maximum need determined, and should a person be prohibited from acquiring more than that limit?  If there is a maximum on acquisition, should a person continue producing wealth once reaching that maximum?

What if that person decides to only produce that which meets that individual’s ‘need’, as established by the ‘democratic’ collective?  Will that person be deemed as failing to ‘contribute’ a fair share?  Should the person be forced to produce, even though there is no personal benefit from that further production?

If forced labor is the answer, “democratic socialism” is just another version of slaves and masters.

I invite proponents of “democratic socialism” to comment.

Dennis P. O’Neil

Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to “Fair share?”

  1. GoHuggaTree says:

    A “fair share” is however much YOU have, after it’s been forcibly transferred to ME.

  2. Saltwater says:

    UPDATE: I received the following response via Facebook:

    “Corporations are getting rich selling water while people are being poisoned by their tap water.”

    Such non sequitur seems to be standard fare for BS supporters unable to cope with realities surrounding their often failed philosophies. My reply:

    “So, the corporations are evil for selling clean drinking water while people are being poisoned by tap water sold to them by their government?

    “Perhaps the government should get out of the poisoned water business and let corporations take over. Those greedy corporations have already proven more socially responsible than the collective when it comes to meeting a true need.”

  3. vonmesser says:

    Not yet has even one Bernie Baby been able (or willing) to tell me what percent of MY earnings I should be allowed to keep.

  4. Hardnox says:

    These asshats need to go back to their “safe spaces” and STFU.

  5. CW says:

    I’m guessing you won’t get any takers on your invitation, Dennis, and it wouldn’t matter since they’re all full of crap anyways, as evidenced by the absurd definition above, which clearly was put forth by some pot-smoking hippee who never produced anything worthwhile in his useless life.

    Liberals love to talk about “fair share” because they get to define what’s “fair.” If a liberal has a city home and a weekend home on, say, Long Island, that’s fair. But if a conservative has one large home in an area that qualifies as “urban sprawl,” that’s not fair. You see? It’s very simple. They win, everyone else loses.

    Any questions?

  6. Marc says:

    Fair Share always mean Pay More.

    Besides they don’t even get the Meme right, what they are talking about is Social Democracy, while similar, isn’t the same as Democratic Socialism.

  7. Uriel says:

    Ok. I’m taking a large license on numbers because I refuse to poke into government numbers that are often skewed but let’s say everyone making over $100,000 per year had to pay altogether in taxation about 70 percent of salary onto all government projects that’s $70,000 per year per person. According to what I think Sanders is saying that would go for every social service plus grants for college plus well whatever Feds think they can get away with. Anyone care to do the math times a fourth of estimated 320million per census 2014 of US? Then another fourth who make $200,000 plus at 70 percent. $140,000 and finally 10 percent of those making $500,000 and up at 70 percent $350,000…………the last forty percent would have everything paid for them. So who really forks it out? No one cause businesses large and small fail, housing lies empty, food production drops to nothing because farmers leave farms. Health care drops below third world because medical looses all its specialists and hospitals. No one wants to be told when to breathe or how much they can earn. Economy stagnates as we wait for government lines to dole out tissue paper from China or meat and vegetables from overseas. Only the few top members of government win cause they make sure their pockets are filled first.