Remember the basic premise of Robin Hood? The rich king and his fellow nobles were exploiting the poor through excessive taxation and oppressive application of the laws of the land.
Robin Hood and his merry men embarked on a novel scheme to steal from the rich and redistribute the loot to the poor through a variety of clever means. Their outlaw hideouts were deep in the forests of England and their “uniform” was green in order to mask themselves most effectively.
Green is certainly the in vogue color, and many in the environmental movement would love to have the general public believe that the Robin Hood philosophy of redistributing income from rich to poor is their modus operandi too.
Perhaps some simple comparing and contrasting would allow us to determine whether this claim stands up to any scrutiny.
First, the issue of the wealthy exploiting the poor continues to be a popular tale of woe and there is often truth in this tale. However, what is interesting is that the demographics of the green movement show that their membership is overwhelmingly well-to-do. So, did they obtain their relative wealth through exploitation of the poor themselves? Or are they feeling the guilt that so often motivates (or dictates) the actions of these limousine liberals? Strike one.
Excessive taxation and oppressive laws are still a problem today in my mind, so where does the environmental movement stack up on this front? They argue consistently for higher taxes – oil, plastic, gasoline and, of course, carbon – and yet I have never heard a member of the green movement call for a reduction in government regulations, no matter how flawed, oppressive, regressive, or just plain outrageously unfair said regs are. Strike two.
How does the green movement fare when we investigate the redistribution of the wealth from the rich to the poor? Here the failure to measure up to Robin Hood’s standards is the starkest. The rich, urban environmentalists have weathered the current recession well enough to continue advocating for their oppressive regulation of every consumer product known and used by Californians while the average California family faces unbelievable hardship. Farmers in the Central Valley have had their livelihoods destroyed and farm workers and their families rely on food banks to survive as a result of federal courts (at the request of said Robin Hoods) prioritizing fish over Californians.
Many small owner-operated truckers, well drillers, small construction firms and a host of others reliant on older diesel engines will be shut down completely based on the actions of our Robin Hood agency, aka CARB, despite flawed scientific data from a scientist who lied about his academic credentials. Small businesses across California continue to barely avoid bankruptcy as they look ahead to the spread of the carbon tax to every area of our lives and wonder how much longer they can survive. Strike three.
Frankly, the only attribute the modern environmentalist shares with Robin Hood and his merry men is the color. The real question facing Californians today is at what cost do we slather ourselves in the color green and how many lost jobs will we tolerate until we scour the forest and round up our modern day Robin Hoods and end their policies until the economy stabilizes.
George Runner is a taxpayer advocate with Americans for Prosperity. He supports policies that protect taxpayers and hold government accountable. He represents California’s 17th Senate District, which includes the High Desert of Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, Santa Clarita and sections of Ventura County. Visit his website at: http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/17