On February twenty third nineteen thirty-four Huey Long proposed a program to distribute the nations wealth. This program was designed to encourage fairness and equality among the economic classes in America. It was also designed to curb the nations growing depression. Huey Long’s main argument with the distribution of the nations wealth was the amount of debt in America. Long stated, “We have too much money owing” referring to the nations large debt with its citizens. Long also argued other matters concerning the distribution of wealth including the abundance of crops. Long understood that this abundance wasn’t limited to agricultural matters. Long stated, “We have a home-loan problem because we have to many houses, and yet nobody can buy them.”
Although Huey Long’s grievances over the amount of debt the country was facing seemed intense, they pale in comparison to his grievances over the distribution of wealth. Long believed that the bulk of the money in the country was distributed with only a few men. He believed that it was these wealthy men that were causing the majority of the economic problems the country was facing. Huey Long being angered by this distribution of wealth and how much was being done about it proposed a plan to redistribute the wealth, predominately among the nations families.
Long proclaimed that this redistribution was not to be divided equally. Long stated, “There should be a guarantee of a family wealth of around $5,000.” Long said this amount should be enough to sustain a home, automobile, radio, other ordinary conveniences and give parents an opportunity to educate their children. Huey Long also proposed to limit large fortunes. His plan was to limit the amount of money one man could own to $50,000,000.00. He proclaimed this limit would be sufficient enough to carry out the balance of his proposal. Long also mentioned a pension for the elderly which gives persons sixty or older thirty dollars a month.
Huey Long’s proposal, which seemed very valiant to a populist society but was flawed in the face of democracy. Long’s plan, which called for the robbery of those who had made good investments, was nothing short of that. Long’s proposal which limited the amount of money one man could own stands in contradiction to the ideals this country was found upon. This ideal Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, would be infringed upon by Lon’s proposal because of the redistribution . If a man accumulates an amount of wealth that he has earned than this man should be able to keep his wealth and do with it as he pleases in accordance with the law. This is governed by the pursuit of happiness. If this man finds happiness in prosperity than why not let him be?
Though the economic state of the nation has left many families in dire straights, the fact that the prosperous should have to pay for this unfortunate situation is preposterous. Long’s proposal called for a distribution of $5,000 to the nations families who did not earn this money. This is another plan that stands to demolish this nations ideals. If a person is given a fair share of which they have not worked for than the ideals cease to be that of this nations but that of a communist society.
History has shown that although prosperous in some instances but short-lived communism pales in comparison to the prosperity that a democracy can bring to a nation. This may seem unfair and maybe even cruel to some but this nation was not founded on fairness it was founded on equality. Every man has an equal chance at prosperity and if he does not heed this chance than he is left behind by the few that have the initiative to observe this chance and take it for all it is worth.
