aghogday wrote:
@PJW
It is not a matter of impoverishing the rich; it is a matter of everyone paying their fair share for the services received in the country. The reduction of taxes has been largely a political gimmick in the last ten years. They were unfunded and benefitted all; rich and poor. Who do you think is going to end up paying for them? If you are young and find your way to employment (good luck to you) eventually you may be the one to assist in paying back those taxes; not the ones that got the most benefit.
Wouldn't it be fairer if the country starts working on it now; paying as we go, instead of waiting until it is your turn? The fact that those tax cuts were not funded makes them handouts. I don't see many rich or poor refusing those handouts.
Maybe I'm having a bad day. Aren't you agreeing with me about the arbitrary sacrifice of what's mine to benefit everyone other than me?
Our System of collecting taxes is not working like it should. Never in our history has nearly fifty percent of the country been able to avoid federal income tax. It is a direct result of the tax cuts of 2001. The money padded my bank account, but I understood at that time that someone else would likely fund the gift that I was receiving.
It was amazing to me that the country finally had a surplus; I found it sad that many people did not understand the ultimate consequence that the war in Iraq and the tax cuts would have on our country. I believe everyone should support the services that our country provides If politicians didn't break the system, it wouldn't require the sacrifice that may ultimately be yours.There is a difference the Left will never understand between cutting taxes arbitrarily and broadening the tax base so a burden is not ostensibly or arbitrarily or in an increasingly global economy borne by one section to its detriment. The Left, squealing with delight as Snowbell falls so Napolean to claim his opponents are simply Snowbellian, read Animal Farm, people, Orwell hated communism as much as the next man, only see big business and the rich as cash cows for the "deserving" poor.
The notion that the rich STOLE - in caps to offend - their wealth from the poor is not only inaccurate and obscenely ideological, it's also offensive to those who aspire to a creative foundation for their wealth.
NEVER TAX INHERITANCES! Taxing an inheritance is taxing an endowment. Once you do that, every, I repeat, EVERY charitable donation, instead of being tax exempt, will automatically, therefore, by logical and ideological extension, also have to be taxed. Do that, and you will kill philanthropy and charity in one fell swoop.
Why are people so guilty of being good at something and receiving reward for it? The irony is, Roger Federer makes more when he loses at the quarter final stage of a grand slam than most of us will make at the peak of our powers in a year. He's feted as the most incredible man, deserving of every dollar he makes. The man that invented the i-pad, however, is not entitled to his wealth? Why? His wealth is also entertainment.
See any disparity here?
Yes, Roger Federer has his Africa foundation. So do most captains of industry, ironically to lower their taxes, also if not have foundations, then contribute to them. You can't force altruism, you can only encourage charity.
Altruism says that I will feed another man and his family before me and my own. Let me ask you, do you see the problem with this?
I don't believe in increasing inheritence taxes above what they are now; and understand that it is in our nature to provide resources to our children once we are gone. It is more acceptable to increase taxes on people while they are working
Capitalism works because people are free to pursue their potential. True Altruism would be if we intentionally fed roaches to better enable them to crawl on us. Whenever we help anyone that is human we postivitely impact our species, however small the contribution is. It would be easier to understand the necessity of this if we still lived in small tribes.
Evolution has resulted in cooperative behavior to ensure that our family gets fed; this often means that more than one family gets fed, but not normally to the exclusion of our own. Part of the reason that Capitalism works so well is that it allows us to maximize our resources for survival. In our country technology and a global economy has resulted in efficiencies that have decreased the opportunities for people to participate.
Mass starvation will never be a solution to this problem. People with guns will do what is necessary to feed their families. Unfortunately this is the way we are headed if we don't address the problem now. If we severely cut social programs when jobs are not availble; the demise of our country will come sooner.
23 Feb 2011, 8:06 pm
