The foundation of liberal views on economics is a super retarded one. Proof inside!

So far, all liberals that I know of, be it everyday ones or those who frequent TV, radio talkshows and websites, yes, not most of them, but all of them construct their belief system solidly on this amusing, if not hilarious foundational idea:

One man's gain is another man's pain. That is, if an owner of a Taco joint made extra 50,000 this month, it must be he exploited his employees harder or he lied to his patronizers more.

Such mentality would, indisputably and inevitably spawn out more aberrant, horrendous yet incredibly comical beliefs—— the entire fuss about “redistribution of wealth” is rooted from the low-IQ view that the wealth of a nation is a constant ‘K’, that if the rich takes too much from K, (let’s call it C), the poor will be left with little or nothing (K-C). There is no way liberals could believe that the ‘K’ is a variable, it increases as a non-linear dependent variable of time (t), or K=F(t), and (F(t+△t) - F(t)) >0 △t ∈(0,＋&#8734.

So while business magnates, inventors and entrepreneurs are working tirelessly and diligently to create wealth, people like Paul Krugman are working tirelessly and diligently trying to figure out this ultimate conundrum: how could you make everybody richer by not working too much or not working at all?

Yes, this is what liberals are like, you can’t argue. Confronting the arguments from liberals regarding economics is tantamount to a cellular-biology professor suddenly were presented with this question: what if the nucleus stop producing energy for the cell? You would be so struck by the sheer ignorance that you simply do not really know where to begin with.

But I suppose we all have to live with that, after all, a society where everyone holds a considerable amount of knowledge on economics is as utopian as it could be. But perhaps revisions can be made on current democratic system so the less-enlightened could not exert so much influence over the course of a society as of now?