Michael Ward responded to my letter on compassion in which he supports socialism and finds it is derived from the word society. The detailed definition in the dictionary of socialism is actually the government owning and administering the means and production of all goods and services. It is further defined as no one owning any private property. Margaret Thatcher once said, “The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.” If the government controlled everything, how hard do you think the wealthy would continue to work? This country not only has one of the highest corporate tax rates, the wealthy are double-taxed with capital gains.
Socialism has failed time after time in other countries. While I admit that capitalism is imperfect, it is a far better system that has proved to work for many decades. It creates jobs and contributes and sustains charitable organizations. Mitt Romney and his wife gave 29.4 percent of their income to charity in 2011. The Obamas gave 21.8 percent and the Bidens gave a mere 1.5 percent.
Mr. Ward, I encourage you to re-read my original letter and this time give it some objective thought, because nowhere did I say all do not deserve compassion. I said compassion is teaching people to learn from their mistakes. My view is not defined by a political party as yours obviously is. It is defined by statistics that show helping someone too much actually prevents them from getting ahead. That is not compassion. I have never made a wealth of money myself, but when I made a mistake and no one bailed me out, I learned valuable lessons that preserved my liberty, and there is no price tag on that.
Laura J. Smyser