The mind boggles sometimes at the way political and economic rhetoric turn themselves into nonsense; i.e., something that does not make sense. Nothing could illustrate this more dramatically than the view espoused regularly that if we give the rich more money they will do more with it to help the economy and that if we assist the poor and generally less well of they will do less to help the economy. Assisting the poor, some even argue, will harm the economy since it remove the incentive of the poor to work harder.
There is something extremely ironic about this way of twisting things which was not lost on the late great satirist and comic George Carlin:
E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post echoed Carlin in a receipt column in the Post:
We might forgive the twisted logic of the rich working harder if provided with more resources and the poor or even ordinary citizen less hard if provided with less if we were not already in the process of expanding the gap between rich and poor and driving the median ordinary household income down:
This twisted logic is no more than the typical line the “haves” use to explain the sad fate of the “have nots” in every age: the less well off deserve their economic status because they spend frivolously, fail to save and are unwilling to work hard while those who do well do so because they have worked hard, saved for the future and “merited” there status. Just think how much harder Bob Crachit would have worked had Ebeneezer paid him even less! Not to mention decent health care for Tiny Tim.