What about redistributing GPAs?
A few points: First, I assume Carthage College is actually on the conservative
side, seeing it's affiliated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America . . . I would also love
to see this video at Berkeley, etc.
Next, one interviewee sees through the ruse and says something like, "But there are no tax breaks for the downtrodden in wealth distribution!" Excuse me? Last time I checked, something like 50%
of Americans pay $0
in federal income tax. I would call that a "tax break" . . .
At the end of the day, I really like the underlying message: How is it "fair" to take money away from those who have earned it and redistribute it to those who failed to earn it? If those who earned it choose
to redistribute their own wealth, then, by all means. Of course, I'm sure someone will counter, "But Mitt Romney didn't earn his wealth, his father did!" Well, good on him (his dad). So, why does his father's success deserve to be ripped from his family and redistributed to non-family members by faceless bureaucrats? As for whether Mitt actually did nothing to earn his own money, here's some lengthy analysis from politifact (you might want to cut straight to the "ruling"): http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jan/20/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-he-didnt-inherit-money-his-parent/
As a parting thought, I want to pose a research question to you who have read this far: What did the original constitution say about income tax and how much later did what it said change?