Income inequality appears to be the latest leftist mantra. It seems not a day goes by where Obama is reading something off his Teleprompter pertaining to the unfair practice of "Income Inequality."

I say reading his Teleprompter, because I know, as do you, he cares nothing about this topic. He knows, as do we, that is just the latest focus group tested whine from the left, hopefully capable of keeping Obamacare off the front page.

Really, it must be tiring to be a committed leftist (and they all should be committed in the mental sense). Are they now, or have they ever been, happy? It must be tiring to be that angry all the time – constantly moving from one misguided cause to another. Sheesh – I'm tired just thinking about it.

It must be even more tiring being a Democrat politician, having to pretend to care about all this nonsense just to maintain the power they appear to crave so badly.

Anyway, Glenn Beck brought up the income crap yesterday. However, before I talk about that, let's go back to late last year when MSNBC's Krystal Ball (yes, apparently that is her real name) went on a rant, advocating for a "Mincome," a national minimum guaranteed income. Remember that?

She claimed that "research" showed that a "Mincome" would not create a disincentive to work and it could "eliminate poverty."

Yes, every citizen would be guaranteed a monthly minimum income.

Well, first off, don't we already do that? It's called welfare, SSI, WIC, SNAP, etc. – as well as what are becoming permanent unemployment benefits. Will these "entitlements" be forfeited in lieu of a "Mincome"? I rather doubt it.

Second, are not the current transfer payments already causing a disincentive to work? And now they want to pile on more?

Well, as socialistic as that idea is, Glenn spoke of the "Maxcome" or maximum income scheme now picking up steam in leftist circles. Yes, the left wishes to institute an arbitrary maximum wage one can earn.

Last year, there was a greatly anticipated vote in socialist Switzerland to initiate just such a "Maxcome." The American left was positively giddy of the prospect of a whole country adopting such a progressive, forward thinking policy.

Prior to the vote in late November, articles were written in the New York Times, and other leftist rags, that extolled the virtues of such a proposal and that America should follow Switzerland's lead.

Then came the vote, and it was soundly defeated. Sixty-six percent of the Swiss wanted nothing to do with it. It was quite a crushing defeat. I'm sure it made American leftists weep.

That reminded me of just such a policy instituted by lefties Ben and Jerry Cohen, of Ben & Jerry's ice cream. These guys were dyed in the wool Vermont socialists. Now this is a private company so they can do whatever they wish.

I believe it was the mid-to-late 80s when they instituted the maximum wage cap. It lasted until 1994 when they had to drop the idea to hire a new CEO that didn't want to work for relative peanuts.

Other companies, like Whole Foods, have tried it only to have to continually raise the cap or maximum income. The constant cap raising was/is due solely to poaching – where other companies offer executives higher pay to jump ship.

So you see, it is just an arbitrary number based on nothing but leftist feel-good policy.

These companies usually find out in short order. That leftist policy is not good for the bottom line or for retaining the best and brightest.

However, the reality of the shortsighted policy will surely not deter slime-ball politicians from pushing its supposed virtue. Whether it works or not is of no consequence to them.

It never is. As is always the case, they will not have to live with it.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.