From his recent CNN opinion piece. I especially like the closing:
I don’t believe the majority always knows what’s best for everyone. The fact that the majority thinks they have a way to get something good does not give them the right to use force on the minority that don’t want to pay for it.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
You’ve obviously never helped people at gunpoint before otherwise you’d know how joyful it is.
Penn Gillette is talking through his butt. If the majority does not have the right to take the money of the rich, then what is democracy? Would he prefer that the rich minority rule the country by oligarchy and take more than they deserve just because they are greedy?
Read some Bastiat. In particular, ideas like:
“Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.”
And:
“Sometimes the law defends plunder and participates in it. Thus the beneficiaries are spared the shame and danger that their acts would otherwise involve… But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them and gives it to the other persons to whom it doesn’t belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish that law without delay – No legal plunder; this is the principle of justice, peace, order, stability, harmony and logic.”
Majority rule without limits is just another type of tyranny. Regarding it source legal plunder is equally unjust whether the recipient is poor, or AIG.