Robert Reich and the politics of envy
Kevin Williamson pens a devastating takedown of Robert Reich, one of the most annoyingly self-righteous left-liberals in the Democrat-academia-media firmament.
Robert Reich [who has] practically made a cult of envy, has taken to abusing the well-off for their acts of charity. Professor Reich, a ward of the taxpayers of California (at $246,199.84 per annum) and a federal ward before that, is persistently unhappy about how other people use their money, and he scoffs that America's rich philanthropists are phony and self-serving, investing too much in opera and ballet and fancy colleges, and too little in feeding the hungry and housing the homeless. He particularly resents the fact that our tax code encourages such giving, with deductions that reduced federal revenue by some $39 billion last year - federal revenue that could have gone toward employing men such as Robert Reich.
After analyzing Reich's misleading claims about the disproportionate tax advantages realized by the wealthy through the deductibility of charitable contributions from taxable income (because Reich fails to compare the deductions to the amount donated), Williamson writes:
Beyond stealing altar offerings from the almighty god of revenue, our philanthropists offend Professor Reich's sensibilities in another way: They don't give to the sort of enterprises he wants them to give to. "A large portion of the charitable deductions now claimed by America's wealthy are for donations to culture palaces - operas, art museums, symphonies, and theaters - where they spend their leisure time hobnobbing with other wealthy benefactors. . . . These aren't really charities as most people understand the term. They're often investments in the life-styles the wealthy already enjoy and want their children to have as well. Increasingly, being rich in America means not having to come across anyone who's not." Unsurprisingly, Progressive America's favorite non-economist-who-plays-an-economist-on-TV does not bother to document what he means by "a large share." Giving to art-and-culture organizations amounted to just over $14 billion in 2012, or about 4.5 percent of charitable contributions, far less than was given to health, human-services, or public-benefit organizations.
Reich is a man consumed with resentment toward those whose wealth exceeds his own. Williamson nails him:

Megan McArdle once observed that in our public discourse, "very rich" is defined as "just above the level a top-notch journalist in a two-earner couple could be expected to pull down." There is no envy like the envy of a $250,000 man in a world of $250 million men
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- What’s the Real Target of the Assault on Tesla?
- MAGA: Progress, Not Perfection
- Saving American Culture through ‘Counter-Spoliation’
- Anecdotes from the Time of Autism
- War Is Hell
- Deep State Anatomy and Physiology
- Sisterhood of the Traveling Pronouns
- Trump’s Tariffs: A Chance to Bring Back Lost Jobs
- Trump's Six-Point Plan for Making America Great Again
- Make IRS Sauce The Same For Both Citizen Goose and Politician Gander
Blog Posts
- Jasmine Crockett concedes she was a DEI hire, admitting ‘no experience’
- California still hasn’t economically recovered from 2020—but it’s a ‘pandemic hangover’, not Democrat policy!
- Cory Booker’s ‘pretty stunning biological feat’ was a pathetic charade
- With the border secure, Trump cleans up Biden’s excesses on parole, TPS
- Baptists and Bootleggers
- Trump’s tariffs are all about putting America first after decades of exploitation
- The Dragon slips the spotlight
- VIDEO: Trump’s tariffs are necessary and completely pro-American
- The Left is experiencing the grief cycle on a loop
- The Democrats’ superiority complex
- On Wisconsin: The pundit class fumbles (again)
- Around the world, the smart way and the dumb way to respond to Trump's tariffs
- Burning Teslas
- Senator, you talk too much
- The Atlantic's phony migrant tear-jerker about a pitiful 'Maryland father' shipped back to El Salvador falls apart