The concept of wealth and its redistribution is a significant topic in contemporary discourse, often framed as a solution to economic inequality. Socialists argue for equal distribution of wealth, viewing disparity as a sign of social injustice that must be corrected by taking from the rich to give to the poor, based on the notion of a 'zero sum game' where wealth is finite. They believe that if someone is rich, it must be at the expense of others, necessitating laws to balance economic disparities. In contrast, the biblical perspective does not advocate for equality in wealth or possessions. Instead, it emphasizes equity, which is impartiality, justice, and legal fairness. God judges with equity, treating all fairly under the same law without partiality, as seen in various scriptures. Equity allows freedom to prosper using individual skills and blessings, whereas equality, understood as sameness of outcome, can repress individual success. God does not mandate that everyone be on the same economic level. Throughout life, individuals experience ups and downs in wealth and status, and God uses these circumstances to teach lessons and build character. He works with both the rich and the poor, as exemplified by figures like Abraham, who was immensely wealthy, and Elijah, who relied on minimal provisions. In the church, disparities exist as well, with members of varying economic standings united as one body, yet not forced into a common pot of resources. Scriptural teachings encourage giving freely and generously, not under compulsion. Paul advises the rich to be ready to give and willing to share, using their wealth as a tool for growth, while the poor can learn sacrificial giving and trust in God, as seen in the widow's offering. The early church's sharing of resources was a temporary, voluntary act to meet urgent needs, not a form of communism, as individuals retained control over their possessions. Even in the Kingdom of God, inequality will persist, as illustrated in the Parable of the Minas, where rewards are given based on individual effort and growth, not equal distribution. God does not support forced redistribution of wealth or social equality but desires that we work profitably and give generously of our own accord to those in need.

Under the Obama Administration, the United States has shifted away from maintaining economic power as a prime directive, focusing instead on achieving fairness at home through the redistribution of wealth. President Obama, as promised during his campaign, is engaged in redistributing the nation's wealth, not based on merit, hard work, or diligence, but by selecting winners and losers to right past wrongs and even the score for the downtrodden. This approach aligns with socialist principles, where the state controls the means of production and distribution, leading to a loss of individual freedoms and the rise of a ruling elite that amasses power, wealth, and privilege while others share what little remains.

God intended that the land remain within families, to be passed down through generations. If poverty forced an Israelite to sell their land, it could be redeemed by a relative or returned to the family during the Year of Jubilee. In the Millennium, God will ensure that everyone's land is secure, with property rights unchangeable and unbreakable, based on the laws in the first five books of the Bible. These laws, including the redemption of property in the Year of Jubilee, will be re-established and maintained, reverting land to its original owners. God will bring His people back to their own land, restoring it to peace and prosperity like the Garden of Eden. Every man will sit under his privately owned vine and fig tree, as stated in Micah 4:4. The right use of land and understanding of property will teach profound lessons about the relationship between people and God, showing the abundance and good that God's way produces. With God's Spirit, we can discern the difference between God's approach to property rights and the world's lack thereof, learning lessons of stewardship, obligation, and authority to become more like Him and prepare for great responsibility in His Kingdom.

Socialist policy, often presented as beneficial through measures like universal healthcare and welfare, appears to support the old, poor, infirm, and disadvantaged with necessary aid. However, beneath these good intentions, socialism operates as a controlling force, seeking to pillage and enslave nations while expanding governmental power. Instead of allowing individuals the liberty to make decisions for themselves, their families, and their nation, socialism insists that an elite group of government experts and bureaucrats should dictate those choices.

In this emerging hybrid economic system, wealth, power, and control are increasingly concentrated in the hands of the government, particularly under the current administration. President Obama has radically redistributed the nation's wealth, not based on merit or hard work, but by selecting winners and losers to right past wrongs and balance disparities for the disadvantaged. The government now takes a significant portion of income, often half or more, for redistribution to others or for its own initiatives, with a progressive tax regime that penalizes higher earners. This shift diminishes the individual liberties and choices inherent in a capitalist system, as government permission is required for nearly every action, from driving a car to starting a business. As this command and control economy takes shape, the American way of life is transforming, moving toward a state of dependency on governmental authority.

In addressing the inequities of our time, the issue of wealth redistribution stands out as a significant concern. It is a sin to charge one group of people more in taxes than another, as fairness demands one price for everybody. God believes in a flat tax, as exemplified by the tithe, which is 10% for all, whether one earns millions or far less. Graduated tax rates, where the successful are charged more, do not sit well with God. The government should not act as a Robin Hood, taking from the rich to give to the poor through legalized stealing of wealth. If wealth is accumulated illegally, it should be addressed legally, but if through discipline and careful management, a family should not be forced to pay a higher tax rate. Additionally, stark contrasts in assistance highlight further inequities, such as a Vietnam veteran on disability struggling in a financial loop where earnings are deducted from his pension, while others, including illegal immigrants and refugees, receive substantial tax-free stipends and benefits, far exceeding what a laborer earns after taxes. These disparities reveal a profound lack of righteous judgment in the handling of wealth and resources.

Richard Ritenbaugh acknowledges that young people display a proclivity to accept socialism, oblivious to the horrendous damage socialist experiments have brought to the world. Politicians of the ilk of Bernie Sanders have fomented hatred toward capitalism by comparing it to an imaginary utopia. Economist Walter Williams insists that the free market, with all its warts, is far superior to collectivism at protecting people from poverty. Poverty is not usually an economic issue but stems from ethical and moral deficits. Socialism simply transfers wealth to the leaders of a government, leaving most of the citizenry in greater poverty. Williams, in his article, "Do These Four Things to Avoid Poverty," suggests that a young person, to keep his nose above poverty or failure, needs to (1.) complete high school, (2.) get a job, (3.) get married before having children, and (4.) be a law-abiding citizen. Poverty is self-caused—not the result of society, bad laws or systemic bigotry. Young people who drop out of school, take drugs, and fornicate set themselves up for failure. The law is no problem for those who obey it, but it will break those who break it, making it difficult to rebound.