When reading The Law by Frederic Bastiat, I often found myself making connections between the political climate he was referencing and the political climate I'm currently living in. For example, Bastiat says legal plunder occurs "... if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong." (p. 15) When I first read this, I immediately thought of the stimulus checks that were being sent not too long ago and recalled people around me complaining that the government was taking their hard-earned tax money and giving it to the unemployed. This then prompted me to research where the stimulus money actually came from, and I discovered that the government wasn't taking any money from American taxpayers. Bastiat also coerced me to ponder law in the U.S. when he referred to routinely things such as public schools and minimum wages as "legal plunder." It left me with the question of if those things qualified as legal plunder, and if so, then the follow up question arose of if all legal plunder was detrimental to a society. After researching, I came to the conclusion that these can be identified as legal plunder, but because of this conclusion, not all legal plunder is egregious. If public schooling is taken into account, it can be classified as legal plunder because different people pay different amounts in property taxes that go towards the funding of public schools. Even though some people might pay more property taxes than others in that area, their children are still getting the same education regardless of how much they pay. Although this can be classified as legal plunder, it is a mild form of it and can ultimately promote societal growth. Children in apartments with parents who struggle to put food on the table have the opportunity to escape poverty by going to the same school that has property tax funding from a child who lives on two acres. Minimum wage is another form of technical legal plunder that can benefit a community. By having a minimum amount that companies pay their employees, they are putting a set amount of money in the employee's pocket that can then be put back into the system by spending it and boosting the economy. According to research, "Low-wage workers who received a $1-per-hour pay increase spent an additional $2,800 in the year after." (Caucci) Therefore, legal plunder by the law is not automatically damaging to citizens; there is an opportunity for it to better a nation. Although Bastiat made some claims I thought were extreme, he also made claims that I viewed as insightful. He reprimands the people who rely on the law to do things they have the capability to do. He mocks, "...'There are persons who have no money,' and you turn to the law." (p. 23) This is incredibly applicable to today because there are people who are complaining about things like racism, the pandemic, and the poor but rely on the government to establish justice with these things while they do nothing. It is not enough to merely wish justice upon something. If action isn't personally taken to try to assist, then there isn't a strong desire for that justice. In conclusion, Bastiat wrongfully attacks some ideals that are beneficial to a nation, and rightfully attacks other ideals that are damaging to a nation.
Image Source
