Once you buy the argument that some segment of the citizenry should lose their rights, just because they are envied or resented, you are putting your own rights in jeopardy-- quite aside from undermining any moral basis for respecting anybody's rights. You are opening the floodgates to arbitrary power. And once you open the floodgates, you can't tell the water where to go.The author is commenting on Barack Obama's recent generalisation that "at some point, you have made enough money.". Do go read the whole piece as he argues that such a policy doesn't breed social justice at all, as socialists seek, but instead manifestly damages society. And the poor will always suffer the most.
The above paragraph leapt off the page though, as it can be applied to just about any facet of human behaviour.
From the moment the government made it compulsory for bikers to wear helmets, a chain reaction has taken place whereby, even if living the life of a nun, the state has a hand in dictating how you live. And behind every law - every cry that 'something must be done' - is a group of people who will, at some point, become targets of those who disagree with their own way of life. Not only that, but by perpetuating the assumption that it is acceptable to meddle with the mores of others, they actively contribute to their own future troubles.
Such does the sum of human enjoyment and prosperity deteriorate with every action designed to lecture, or coerce, others.
Or, as John Stuart Mill once put it:
"All errors which [a citizen] is likely to commit against advice and warning, are far outweighed by the evil of allowing others to constrain him to what they deem his good"Which kinda proves that not only are the righteous often a financial drain on our country, or any country for that matter, they are also a social one.
In short, although they truly believe they are improving matters, in reality the best thing they could do to improve the overall state of the nation is hang themselves from the nearest tree.