We have heard on more than one occasion someone describe President-elect Barack Obama’s intent to increases taxes for the wealthiest Americans and give tax breaks to the middle class as redistributing money to the “undeserving.”

What does that mean? Who truly is and is not undeserving?

Sure, there are some wealthy people who have worked hard to get where they are today. Most of those types of wealthy men and women know better than the others what it is like to be without wealth. There are two kinds of these nevue riche (newly rich) people. The kind who realize they were fortunate and want to give back, and the kind who go around flaunting their wealth with big mansions, fancy cars and hot air talk.

But if you look at most of the wealthiest of Americans, they don’t live or think that way because they were born with silver spoons in their mouths. It’s a lot easier to make money when you can start out with a large sum of capital. They have names like Walton, Cargill, Rockefeller, Hearst, Mariott.

Most have used their wealth to gain greater wealth, which is great, but how can anyone determine how of that is “deserved” and how much is simply done on the backs of middle-class workers, foreign labor or simply the brilliance of good employees?

Does a middle manager who works long hours away from the family to put bread on the table for the spouse and children deserve a greater tax burden or does the company owner who reaps the profits, gets to spend every night with the family and can take vacations at the drop of hat?

Are CEOs, even the ones who sent their companies into the tank and still received massive bonuses, more deserving of a tax break than ordinary folks trying to get from paycheck to paycheck in a penny-pinching economy?

Pundits need to think again when they call the poor and middle class “undeserving.” Not everyone started from the same starting line in life. Just because a person makes more money doesn’t mean they worked harder for it than the next guy. They just like to think they did.