Therefore, they say, it is justified to take wealth away from the former and give it to the latter. The typical means leftists use to accomplish this is to adopt a steeply progressive tax on income, wealth, and, indeed, anything not nailed down, and transfer the boodle to those in need.

According to U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders: "In order to reduce the outrageous level of inequality that exists in America today and to rebuild the disappearing middle class, we must establish an annual tax on the extreme wealth of the top 0.1%." He also favors "a 95 percent tax on windfall profits of companies that bring in more than $500 million in revenue annually." Nor is he oblivious to the fact that CEOs earn far more money than the people on the shop floor or assembly line. In his view, "Companies with large gaps between their CEO and median worker pay would see progressively higher corporate tax rates, with the most unequal companies paying five percentage points more in corporate taxes."

And what would Sanders have the government do with all that mulcted money? He urges that welfare and entitlement programs be stepped up: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, housing subsidies, welfare (e.g., assistance to needy families), nutrition programs, and community health centers, for example. In other words, ship more money to the poor, either directly or indirectly.

There is not a single left liberal who would quarrel with any of that.

But let us dig a little deeper. Why not, instead of transferring money to the poor, combat the qualities and characteristics that are oftentimes responsible for the great disparity of income in the first place, against which Sanders is inveighing?