Protests are against wealth concentration, not hard workers

Innovative thinkers such as Steve Jobs or Jim Pattison thrive on success, not on promises of ostentatious self-aggrandizement

Re: Nothing wrong with rewarding hard workers (Letters, Oct. 21).

The letter writer asks what’s wrong with a system that rewards hard-working entrepreneurs who end up employing thousands of people, and he’s right: hard work deserves rewards. What critics of the current system decry, however, is the concentration of wealth at the top, not the fact that anyone has wealth at all.

Owning a spacious home, eating well and providing a secure future for your family are all signs of wealth. Owning a yacht, driving a $75,000 car and flashing diamonds are signs of grandeur. They are not necessities, and their absence shouldn’t be an impediment to a go-getter.

Innovative thinkers such as Steve Jobs or Jim Pattison thrive on success, not on promises of ostentatious self-aggrandizement; raising their tax rate to bring everyone else up a bit wouldn’t steer them away from business exploits that employ many.

What is sinisterly implicit in arguments against increased parity of wealth is the assertion that millionaires have earned every cent through superhuman effort and the poor have earned their sad lot through unparalleled laziness.

Neither is true: most needy people have worked extremely hard their whole lives, and many wealth-hoarders are rich through questionable business ethics, greed, and luck.

R. Bernardi

Victoria