Don't Hate The Rich:
What someone else has has nothing to do with what you don't have ...
The Dow Jones Market was created in 1896. That would be '0'. When Bush 41 left office the Dow was somewhere between 3,000 to 3,500. Wealth was created. When Clinton left office the Dow had reached above 12,000. That much wealth eclipsed the amount of wealth created 3 times the wealth created between 1896 and 1992. I understand Clinton had the internet. Still, wealth was created and not TAKEN. On April 15th, 2026, The Dow reached a record high at 48,578.
TODAY, especially in New York, Democrats want to take more from the rich and take your tip money to pay for Social Programs and buy votes from Illegals.
One year Michael Jordan had to pay 17 Million in taxes. It doesn't matter what you make; no one should have to pay 17 Million to the Government. I bet Jordan could spend his 17 Million better than the Government could.
One more thing. The top 1% pay 50% of the tax revenue. The bottom 50% hardly pay anything. If you don't care about that you are probably a Marxist.
Has anyone 'Broke' ever gave you a PAYCHECK?
#taxes #Rich
The Zero-Sum Fallacy: Why the Left’s Obsession with What Others Have Ignores the Miracle of American Wealth Creation
There is a phrase circulating in the more contemplative corners of social media that cuts to the heart of the modern American political divide: “What someone else has has nothing to do with what you don't have.” To the conservative ear, this is not a platitude; it is the foundational principle of a free economy. It is the rejection of the zero-sum fallacy the corrosive, left-wing belief that for one person to gain a dollar, another must lose one.
The historical record, particularly the ledger of the Dow Jones Industrial Average, stands as a towering, unassailable witness against that fallacy. When Charles Dow first tabulated his average of a dozen stocks in 1896, the number was effectively zero. It was a blank canvas upon which the genius of American industry, risk-taking, and capital formation would paint the greatest wealth portrait in human history. That wealth wasn't "taken" from a fixed pot; it was created out of thin air by human ingenuity and freedom.
Consider the economic topography as we entered the 1990s. When President George H.W. Bush left office, the Dow hovered in the 3,000 to 3,500 range. Let that sink in for a moment. It took 96 years—from the Industrial Revolution, through two World Wars, the Great Depression, the rise of the automobile and the airplane—to build roughly 3,000 points of value in the most dynamic market on earth. That was the sum total of American enterprise as measured by the Dow at the dawn of the Clinton era.
And then, something remarkable happened. Over the subsequent eight years, the Dow exploded past 12,000. The wealth generated in that single decade did not just match the prior century; it *tripled* it. According to the data in the post referenced, the wealth created between 1996 and 2000 eclipsed the aggregate wealth creation from 1896 to 1992 by a factor of three.
Now, the progressive left will reflexively dismiss this. They will mumble, "Clinton had the internet." And yes, he did. But that admission is where the left’s argument collapses under its own weight. The internet was not a government program. It was not a confiscatory tax scheme or a redistribution formula drafted by a bureaucrat in Washington. The internet boom was the result of entrepreneurs in garages, fiber optic cables laid by private capital, and a policy environment that for a brief, shining moment actually restrained the regulatory state and allowed capital gains to flow toward innovation rather than the IRS.
Herein lies the conservative lesson embedded in the original post: Wealth was created, not TAKEN.
The distinction is everything. The left views the Dow at 3,000 and the Dow at 12,000 and sees only an opportunity for "fair share" extraction. They see the guy at the top and immediately pivot to what the guy at the bottom doesn't have. But the Dow crossing 12,000 wasn't a transfer of existing cash from a steelworker in Pittsburgh to a programmer in Palo Alto. It was the market’s valuation of new things that previously did not exist: e-commerce, search engines, digital communication, and increased productivity. The pie got bigger. Infinitely bigger. The person with a 401(k) who held an S&P 500 index fund saw their retirement security rise without requiring a single dollar to be taken from their neighbor.
Fast forward to the present. The post cites a recent milestone: On April 15th, 2026, the Dow reached a record high of 48,578. It is worth pausing to appreciate the symmetry of that date and that number. April 15th is Tax Day the day the federal government demands its pound of flesh, operating under the zero-sum assumption that to fund the public good, it must confiscate private capital. Yet even under the weight of that confiscation, and despite a regulatory apparatus that has grown obese since the Clinton years, the market roars toward 50,000.
From zero in 1896 to 3,500 in 1992. From 12,000 in 2000 to nearly 50,000 today. If wealth were a fixed pie, these numbers would be mathematically impossible. They are only possible because of the conservative economic truth that free people, operating in free markets, create value. The guy who invented the smartphone didn't steal the value of the rotary phone; he rendered it obsolete and created trillions in new utility. The companies driving the Dow toward 48,578 in 2026 whether they are in AI, biotech, or energy are not siphoning money from the lower classes; they are solving problems and increasing the standard of living for everyone.
The Politics of Envy vs. The Mechanics of Growth
The left's entire political strategy, however, is dependent on you forgetting this history. They need you to believe that Jeff Bezos's fortune is the direct cause of your struggle. They need you to look at the Dow at 48,578 and feel anger, not awe. Why? Because if you realize that what someone else has has nothing to do with what you don't have, you stop demanding that the government take it from them. And if you stop demanding that, the progressive machinery of control loses its fuel.
The conservative perspective acknowledges that life isn't fair and that opportunity isn't perfectly equal. But it insists on a different remedy. The remedy is not to burn down the orchard because one tree grew taller than the others. The remedy is to ensure the soil remains fertile and the gates remain unlocked. When the government confiscates wealth to "balance the scales," it removes the capital that would have been used to build the next 12,000 points of Dow growth. It removes the seed corn.
Look again at that timeline: 1896 to 1992. A slow, grinding, but steady climb hampered by world wars and, notably, the highest marginal tax rates in history. Then, the 1990s a period of freer trade and a lighter capital gains touch unleashed a tripling of a century's worth of value in just eight years. And now, despite the immense headwinds of national debt and inflation, the market persists in climbing higher because the human drive to innovate is stronger than the government's desire to regulate.
The post's closing image the Dow at 48,578 on April 15th is poetic. It is a reminder that even as the government takes its share, the private sector continues to build. The conservative response to this should not be smugness; it should be a renewed commitment to stewardship. We must protect that engine. We must push back against the zero-sum rhetoric that seeks to punish success.
What someone else has is a testament to what is possible in a free society. It is a scoreboard of creation. What you don't have is not a wound inflicted by them; it is a space yet to be filled by your own contribution to that great, ever-growing ledger of American wealth. Let us celebrate the record highs not because they make a few people rich, but because they prove that the system works for the many when it is allowed to work for the one.