Philosophical difference as to who controls the money

We know power all comes down to money and who controls it. In a free market society businesses and their leaders will get wealthy. They risk their capital, put in hard work, provide a good or service to their fellow man and justly profit. Yes some unscrupulous business leaders, in an attempt to out-do their peers, over pay themselves. I am not suggesting that anyone should dictate what a private company pays its leaders; I am saying that there is a point where it is less about paying for performance and more about accumulating more than that pompous guy at the country club. Morally speaking, in a perfect world, these leaders would get their share but they would also share the excesses with their employees, in the form of bonuses, etc (can you say supply side).

However there are those who find it unacceptable that this kind of trust (to share with their employees) is entrusted to private citizens. These people usually end up in a governmental position of power. To get that position they preach to the employees that the boss can't be trusted to share the wealth with them. Only if the politician is elected will they be guaranteed to get their share. Since the employees outnumber the bosses, the politician gets elected. Once in power the politician pushes to raise taxes on the business leaders so the politician can be the one to give money to the employees. So now you have an individual in government that did not risk capital, work hard nor provide a good or service to his fellow man, being given credit for sticking up for the little guy by making the boss pay. Doesn't seem right, huh?

Well it gets worse. The same politician realizes that not all of the employees are voting for him even though he is sticking it to their boss. They realize that the bonus from the boss exceeded any schadenfreude they get from watching the politician take from the boss. So the politician begins to use the money he takes from the rich bosses and gives it to people in the district that don't work or don't want to work. These people get just enough from the government to maintain their sustenance, but the key is they remain loyal to the politician as he continues to demagogue about sticking it to those rich people.

At the same time the politician becomes rich from being in office, names buildings after himself and attempts to entrench himself in his government position for a lifetime. A lifetime of passing laws to take money from those who earn it and take credit from those he gives it to for making their lives better, when ironically their lives don't ever get better.

Liberal socialist types, in their heart of hearts, believe that there should be equal outcomes when it comes to living standards. They believe because some are rich and some are poor then there is an injustice that only they can fix. Their fix is the wealth should be shared by those at the top with those at the bottom. They pine about this all the time.

In the capitalist system, not everyone is the equal! In any system not everyone is equal. It is impossible to equalize outcomes because people are different. There are different personalities. Everyone has a different drive to succeed. Some people are under achievers. There are people who work 60 hours a week to get by and there are people who won't work at all. Both get what their labors bring them.

Liberal socialist types see only one solution. The governing authority takes money from the achievers and transfer it to the underachievers. This philosophy makes four dangerous assumptions:

1. The people in government are benevolent. They are human. They have absolute governing power and that corrupts absolutely. I don't see benevolence but only the potential for corruption.
   
2. The people in government will treat money they have not earned with the same respect as a business owner. Not possible. Remember when that bully took your bike? Did he treat it the same way you did after you spent your hard earned money to buy it?
3. The poor that get the handouts will benefit. Ya they'll have a bare minimum but what incentive do they really have to make their lives better?
4. The rich will continue to work just as hard whilst more of their money is taken in higher taxes. Not forever. Every individual has a breaking point where they stop working because most of what they are earning is going to that government guy to give to the non-achiever in the name of compassion.
   

SUMMARY: Conservative politicians say cut taxes on EVERYONE, including the rich. Then the risk takes will invest their money in private sector ventures (new businesses and subsequently new jobs). If the business succeeds. Liberal politicians seek control by means of the tax system to limit the power of the rich (making themselves rich) and dole out pittances to everyone else.