What value do you place on your citizenship? How much do you think is your “fair share”? Why does a rich man have to pay more than a poor man for his citizenship? Does he really receive more for his payment? If the rich pay more in taxes, then should they not get more of the politicians ear for it? We complain about lobbyists, and big business buying our politicians, but if they are paying nearly all of the taxes, shouldn’t they? Is the Liberal argument that the rich should pay nearly all of the taxes, and have no representation? I believe that is what led us to revolt from Britain in the first place. The Government is to provide for our national defense and a system of laws that are equitable. The laws once written are required to apply to all equally. No man receives more benefit from national defense than another, and if the laws are equitable then every mans benefit from Government is the same. Logically this would mean every man should have the same burden. So let’s try some numbers….
360 million people in the US.
3.552 Trillion dollars in the 2010 Budget (Mandatory+Discretionary)
Comes to $9866.67 per person
$39466.68 tax burden for a family of 4
$42,700 Mean family income in 2007 (per Cencus.gov)
That would leave a family of 4 $3233.32 to live off of for a year
This leads me to some interesting conclusions. The Progressives want to create class conflict. They can stay in power by buying the poor at the expense of the rich. Interesting facts…
At the end of Woodrow Wilson‘s term the tax rate for the highest bracket was 77%.
At the end of FDR’s reign anyone making over $200,000 was taxed at 94%!
These are the Presidents that Obama idolizes.
Now back to what I was saying. If every man had to pay for his burden on society there would be quite a call to reign in spending don’t you think? But the one thing Government does well (the only thing actually) is grow. They increase spending on welfare and other programs to buy the masses. They promote the illusion that you can get something for nothing. Reality check there is no free lunch! Milton Friedman described it beautifully in his “There is no free lunch” lecture. Businesses do not pay taxes, people do. If you raise the tax on a business the money has to come from somewhere. Friedman outlines the 3 choices a business will face. It can either:
1. Raise prices to the consumer This will directly take money out of the pockets of the people
2. Lower either the number or the pay scale of employees This will directly take money out of the pockets of people.
3. Makes fewer profits and pay out less dividends to investors Guess what, still people. Your 401K or your private retirement will see less dividends. This will again, directly take money from the pockets of people.
As well as it sounds to eat the rich, we are in essence slitting our own throats. Any tax on the rich will trickle down to the consumer. If a rich man has less money, he can not create as many jobs or buy as many products from the company that employs you.
Let’s take a look at the seemingly harmless “Death tax”. Anyone who leaves an estate behind worth more than $1 million will have 55% of it taken by Uncle Sam. This is in essence a double tax. If a man paid his taxes his entire life he is then taxed again upon death. Also the recipient will have to record his inheritance as income taxing this same money a third time.
I think at the very least everyone should be required to pay the same percentage of their income. As it stands the richest pay 60% while almost half of all Americans pay no tax whatsoever. I say every person should pay 10% of their income to taxes. If the Government can’t run on that it needs to cut spending period. The Government is not providing you a free lunch. They are giving you your children’s lunch. they system is unsustainable and eventually our children or grandchildren will have to shoulder our burden. Is that right to saddle our children with our debt?