Equality under the law
- A free, peaceful, and civilized society requires that all people have an equal opportunity under the law.
- The best way to help people experiencing poverty is to create the conditions necessary to help them prosper. The best way to do that is to calibrate all laws with the Legal Principle.
The impossibility of equal opportunity
- Inequality exists along every axis, not just wealth – we are all different, endowed with different skills and gifts.
- Many of us would love to play football/soccer for Real Madrid. Real Madrid discriminates against us because of our physical attributes. Is this fair? Similarly, is it fair that only fast runners win olympic gold medals? Not only is equal opportunity impossible, but if sports teams ceased to select based on excellence, and instead tried to grant equal opportunity for all, they would no longer be a great sports teams.
- Given that we all have inherent differences, instead of comparing ourselves with others and seeking the impossible goal of permanent wealth equality, the 3L Movement’s members focus on aligning with the Aspirational Values, including voluntary kindness and high character; being the best version of ourselves.
Wealth inequality
- To the extent any person’s fantastic but peacefully accumulated wealth is a problem, it is a moral problem. As a moral problem, we must resolve it without resorting to the law.
- Attempting to solve the alleged moral problem of wealth inequality by involuntarily appropriating or stealing money from one person to redistribute to another only creates additional problems.
- Besides violating the Legal Principle and opening the door to legalizing theft as a proposed solution for many other issues, countless practical problems arise regarding who to steal from, in what amount, at what times, and who to redistribute to with the associated host of related issues.
- Our goal should be that the poor become wealthier, rather than that all should have the same level of wealth regardless of overall prosperity.
Forced wealth redistribution disincentivises productivity
- Even if we could magically equalize all wealth worldwide, or even in a given community, this would be short-lived as people begin to earn, invest, inherit, and spend money differently. In short order, financial inequalities would again reemerge. Would we violate the Legal Principle again to redistribute wealth in another effort to equalize people forcefully? Productive people will quickly realize there is no point in earning money, at least over a certain amount, as it would be stolen by the government and again redistributed to others who reasonably and quickly conclude there is no point in working. The net result of forced redistribution to combat financial inequality ensures mass poverty.
What is the ‘right amount’ of redistribution, anyway?
- Laziness, drunkenness, irresponsibility, lack of motivation, or even excessive spending are all complicated issues. As with all other problems, initiating force is not the solution. Such issues must be solved voluntarily by virtuous people acting to help others for the right reasons. Indeed, this is precisely what the Aspirational Values, including voluntary kindness, encourage. We can accomplish our goals by enthusiastically promoting voluntary charity and creating the economic and pro-freedom conditions necessary to raise overall living standards.
Who to redistribute to, anyway?
- Many proponents of forced redistribution of wealth would not support equalizing all wealth worldwide, but only between the arbitrary borders of their own nation state.
Benefits of hugely wealthy people
- We are all better off, with at least some people having disproportionate wealth sufficient to invest in new ventures that directly or indirectly benefit us all.
Taxation
- Tax is theft, but 3L does not advocate eliminating all taxes immediately due to essential services and earned benefits needing funding until voluntary mechanisms become sustainable.
- It may make sense to eliminate all taxation upon the least wealthy first.
