An experience this summer helped reaffirm where I stand in today’s political and social environment.
This past week I was spending a few nights in a place that had a communal refrigerator. I had placed a twelve pack of soda in the refrigerator on the second night of the stay with a name tag and date on it. The next day I had noticed that the twelve pack had maybe been missing a soda or two, but I really was not sure, due to the hectic days and nights. The third night I actually walked into the room with the fridge and saw a man drinking the same kind of soda that I had put in the fridge. I said nothing, merely opened the fridge and pulled out one of my sodas, which ushered a response from the man who knew he was busted. “Sorry, I didn’t think you would notice.” “Well of course I noticed!” I thought to myself. But, instead I simply stated “it’s OK, I am leaving tomorrow anyway-I hope.”
What I should have said was “you’re stealing my soda! I’m calling the cops!” So now my restless brain won’t let this small insignificant situation go without a full walk through and you are stuck here reading about it.
Look, I don’t consider myself well to do by any means. Just because I could afford a twelve pack of soda or had the foresight to provide that much soda for myself, does in no way mean that a man without soda can just take it from me. And really, just because I had some soda, really doesn’t mean that I had enough for myself. What if I was there for an extended stay. I am sure if he would have asked me for some, I would have undoubtedly given him some without hesitation, but the point is, he didn’t.
Well, did I have plenty of soda for the time? Yes, but it was not his soda to take! I think we can all agree with that, right? Well probably not. And so enters the political discussion.
When President Obama makes statements like… “I think that ultimately, what we’re going to have is a package which will probably include some additional revenue from well-to-do people, including me and you, who can afford to pay a little bit more so that working families, people who are going to their job every single day, can have a little more security on their health care,” I say you’re stealing President Obama! This is not meant to be a democratic vs. republican discussion, honestly. This is about your money and how it’s spent by the government. I don’t care if you make 100 dollars a year or 100 million a year. You have earned that money for yourself, not for the government.
The government is stealing from us. It really can be put in such antagonistic terms. Some would argue that that is why you have representation, so you can tell your representative how you would like to spend the money. Cue laughter! Let’s take 5 dollars of your tax money… Would you rather have it spent on training Chinese prostitutes to drink less or spent on paying some other country not to cut down trees? How about roads, medical research, or any other government spending program? Or, would you rather have those five dollars to spend on your family or even yourself. Personally I want it for my family. I would rather spend those 5 dollars on some plastic toy that would bring a smile to my son’s face for an hour of a day then to have it recklessly spent by the government. If we all can’t agree on that I would be shocked. If you don’t agree, feel free to call me greedy, selfish, whatever, I don’t care.
Remember… Benjamin Franklin said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” I truly believe we are at that point. But, it’s not the people who are grabbing the money, it’s special interest groups.
Let’s just look at recent spending by this administration and the previous one. Lets start by converting debt to miles per hour, Bush was spending at 64 mph, the fastest ever, should we complain, yes! Now, Obama as president has released his own numbers, he will drive the debt at 174 mph!
Cat got your tongue? I hope so!
While I should have said to that man “You’re stealing my soda! I’m calling the cops!” I do realize that man, AKA the government, can not function without taxes (soda). I want to merely suggest that every taxpayer have a greater say in how their taxes are spent. Maybe we should all pay the same rate, (flat tax or fair tax) instead of allowing the government to decide who is rich and who is poor. While we are facing the greatest loss in tax revenue since the great depression, I think its time we looked at how and when the government collects our hard earned money, AKA taxes.
Hutch McPheters
Wilton, ME
I do not want to put words in your mouth or unfairly label you Hutch but what you seem to be describing is libertarianism where every citizen independent and free from government interference. The problem with libertarianism as a political philosophy is that it essentially anarchy for the rich. It smacks of selfish greed and those who espouse the philosophy do not seem to feel that they own anyone anything for their success or the opportunities afforded them in this country.
Taxes are not a form of theft rather they are a part of the social contract between citizens and their government. The nation-state is about providing for the good of the whole. It provides the framework which allows individual the opportunity to prosper. The goal of the nation-state is to outlive and outlast the generation of its founders and provide for future generations. The government’s function is to decide on how best to invest and use the tax revenue. Granting more people a voice at the table muddles the argument. If every individual was to choose what their tax dollars paid for than we probably would not have much of a military, Department of Agriculture, or a National Academy of Science. We can probably agree that these things are important to the nation but seriously who would want to put their money into corn subsidies or biodiversity studies in Alaska?
I do think that as a nation we are spending beyond our means. The national debt is huge and will have to be paid back. Hutch, you are right, the tax revenues are down so where are we going to get the money? A flat tax is not the answer. If anything it would lower tax revenues even further and take food out of the mouths of those cannot afford it. If you value social stability than you cannot honestly support a flat tax. One way of raising revenues would be to eliminate the Bush era tax cuts. This would raise around $43 billion which is badly needed (http://wealthforcommongood.org/). Why shouldn’t people who earn more pay more? John Dillinger used to reply when asked why he robed banks, “Because, that’s where the money is.” Why tax the rich more, because they have more.
The rich can afford a higher standard of living and have benefited the most from living in a nation which allows such prosperity. They can also afford the burden of higher taxes without significantly compromising their lifestyle. The counter argument is that investment and incentive are hampered by higher taxes. I find this argument to be hollow because first, the Bush tax cuts did not lead to higher rates of investment. Second, if given the choice to earn $30k a year at a tax rate of 10% or earn $100k taxed at 35% people will always choose to earn more.
For those who do not want to pay taxes, I challenge you to find a nation on earth which allows the same amount of political and social freedom as the United States with lower taxes. I do support an overhaul of the U.S. tax code but I honestly think it would lead to higher taxes rather than lower. The problem is that we all sink or swim together as a nation so opting out is not an option.
I can’t find the source, but someone once said, “The wealthy should be glad to pay for the privilege of doing business in a stable, secure society.” Simply put, if you’re one of those folks who earns a hundred million dollars in this country, you’ve done so because the taxes you’ve paid the government have given you and the rest of the public an education, the strongest military in the world to defend you, and the protection of the freedoms and liberties that allow you to engage in such a profitable business in the first place. If you make a hundred million dollars per year, and you feel as if the government is “stealing” from you by charging you a slightly higher tax rate, I suppose I would invite you to take your family and your business to a place like El Salvador or Uruguay — where the tax rates are relatively low — and see how much you enjoy the alternative.
All of that aside, simply labeling taxes “theft” by the government is an irresponsible distraction from the real issue, not to mention wholly inaccurate. Open dialogue and bipartisan cooperation will bring us to the best conclusion on the issue of taxes and health care — not polarizing words and punditry.
Mike, i am not sure if you comprehension is very good or not, but you said “Taxes are not a form of theft rather they are a part of the social contract between citizens and their government.” Then you use a statement from John Dillinger robbing banks to justify taxing the rich more!
I know if you will ever sense your own hypocrisy, but come on man.
I don’t no if you have ever read the constitution, but i believe they meant what they said when they wrote it.
Article I – The Legislative Branch
Section 8 – Powers of Congress
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Any where in there say we have to give money to Costa Rica so they don’t cut down trees!
if you really think the Evil Rich are not paying enough, and we should tax them more so we can create even more wasteful spending programs that go way over budget please take some time and read this summary of the 2007 tax data
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html
Ben,
i feel its stealing because the government is taking my money and essentially just flushing it down the toilet in many case. We are talking about thousands of wasteful and unnecessary spending programs.
“The 2009 version of “Federal Spending by the Numbers” shows spending and deficits surging at a pace not seen since World War II. Washington will spend $33,932 per household in 2009–$8,000 per household more than last year. While much of this spending is a temporary result of the recession and financial crisis, President Obama’s 2010 budget would replace this temporary spending with permanent new programs. Consequently, by 2019–a time of assumed peace and prosperity–Washington would still spend $33,000 per household (adjusted for inflation), essentially making permanent this year’s $8,000 per household spending hike. These numbers do not even include the cost of the President’s health plan.”
analysis by Brian M. Riedl
While we’re pulling out random quotes, how about a few more relevant ones?
“‘Tis true that governments cannot be supported without great charge, and it is fit everyone who enjoys a share of protection should pay out of his estate his proportion of the maintenance of it.” –John Locke
“The subjects of every state ought to contribute toward the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.” –Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, 1776
“Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.” –Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., Compania de Tabacos v. Collector, 1904
There you go again using strawman arguments, Hutch — nobody said anything about “The Evil Rich.” Nobody is arguing that the rich should pay a higher proportion of taxes because they’re “Evil.” In fact, I’m no longer sure exactly what you’ve been trying to get at this whole time — are you arguing that they shouldn’t pay more at all, or that the taxes we DO pay shouldn’t go to funding projects overseas? If anyone’s going to be convinced by what you have to say, you’ve got to succinctly identify a problem and suggest a solution, not just repeat talking points from Fox News.
Ben,
I am a little upset you pulled out the typical liberal rant against fox news. Typically liberal tell people you are so excepting, then demonize anything that varies from your opinion. Should i come back with you watch to much MSNBC, NBC, CNBC, CBS, ABC, or NPR? In case you were not aware NBC, CNBC, MSNBC, parent company is GE.
General Electric agreed to pay $50m Aug 3rd to settle accounting fraud charges by US regulators, calling into question the conglomerate’s legendary ability to deliver consistent earnings growth.
GE receives 140 Billion in Bailout funds, so your tax money is being used to pay fines.
Obama has named Jeffrey Immelt, CEO of NBC Universal parent GE, to his new economic advisory board.
Under the Obama plan, the “cap and trade” credits will be issued to all producers of energy. GE is the largest manufacturer of wind turbines as well as other electrical generation turbines used in coal, gas, atomic, and hydroelectric electricity generation facilities. GE stands to make hundreds of Billions
No back to where i started if you can’t figure out that i am not pleased with the tax system and how my money is spent, i can’t help you.
soda is bad for you.