Thursday, April 16, 2009

Tax Day

So yesterday was tax day. My taxes were done awhile ago, but I wish I could have participated on one of these "Tea Parties" instead of being bored at work. I'd love to be part of a real, meaningful protest, it sounds like fun. Plus, it's a way to "stick it to The Man", who, ironically, is now a black man.

I don't want to say too much on taxes, because I'm already tired of the subject, and it is very frustrating to see the level of ignorance that is out there. On the other hand, it's frustrating enough that I have to say something.

I hate hearing people call for government to tax "the rich" because they can afford it, and to tax corporations because they exploit the lay man. Even if a corporation gives its executives large bonuses while the company is failing, what right does the government have to dictate how that money is spent? It is not the government's money. And if we tax a corporation that the government decides needs to be punished, how does that help the people at the bottom? There is no such thing as a corporate tax. As with every other expense, it gets passed on to the employees and the consumer. Plus, as has already been seen, once the government starts deciding how an individual or corporation should spend its money, the government has gained control over our lives that it won't give up easily. If the President of the United States can fire a CEO on a whim, what's next? This is power our government was never meant to have, and it is frightening.

And what about the rich? If one person decides to pursue a particular lifestyle, why should the government stand in the way? Because one person has more ability than another? More drive, more diligence? This is the land of opportunity, and the last thing we need to preserve our freedom is for the government to put a cap on achievement. Looking out for those who are in unfortunate circumstances is one thing, but cutting down those at the top helps nobody. If Donald Trump wants the headache of managing billions of dollars, why should that bother me? I don't want it. The great thing about this country is that I can be successful if I want to, and I can measure that success in my own way. And if I want to earn money, who can offer me a job, and pay me? Not those at the bottom, it's those at the top.

The thing that Obama and so many others don't realize (or do, and resent, and want to keep us ignorant of) is that rich people move this economy. Rich people buy cool gadgets when they're brand new and ridiculously expensive, investing in the technology and bringing it to us ordinary guys. If no one had bought a cell phone or a flat screen TV when they were still impractical, they could never have been mass produced for me to afford one. I couldn't afford a cell phone fifteen years ago, but Rush Limbaugh could, and that made the technology work. Not the government, not those of us on the bottom, though we have our part in the economy as well. We also have the opportunity, if we want to, to rise in this economy if we are willing to put forward the work necessary. Chance is involved, too, but most success stories involve diligence in times of hard luck. (If you haven't, please watch The Pursuit of Happyness; it is an excellent true story of this kind of success.)

Taxes are harmful to the economy, and this has been proven time and again. The best example that comes to mind is in the 1980s, when Ronald Reagan doubled IRS revenues in eight years by dramatically lowering the top marginal tax rate. But if you dig deep enough, it is not about money to Obama and his people, it is about fairness. When a liberal defines fairness, they usually mean everyone ends up the same. When a conservative defines fairness, we mean that their reward is proportional to their contribution. Some people honestly cannot contribute, and contrary to popular belief, we conservatives do not want them to suffer, and would gladly contribute to charitable causes. The more we are taxed, however, the less money there is for charity, and the more money goes to pork spending. What if the government steps aside and people don't help the poor on their own? If that is the case, then we have problems beyond what can be solved by government. Fortunately, this is not the case in this country.

I could go on with facts and figures and numbers to support my case, but the bottom line is that the government has grown to powerful and intrusive in our lives, and even assuming government has our best interests in mind, it is dangerous to give a government this much power. The government has always squandered money that didn't belong to it, and now it is making up for a lack of money by spending money that doesn't exist in amounts never before seen. It's like paying the fee for a bounced check by writing another bad check. It won't fix this economy, it will and is making it worse.

There is one object lesson that is of value, and it is happening in New York. Governor David Paterson recently signed a major tax increase on "millionaires" that was the final straw for Rush Limbaugh, who is getting rid of his assets in New York. Paterson laughed it off, saying "If I knew that would be the result, I would've thought about the taxes earlier!" Why is this important? I'm sure a lot of people think it's great that taxes can chase away such an awful person as Rush Limbaugh, though I'm not one of them, being obviously a fan of Rush. Here is an excerpt of a recent article by Neil Cavuto, one of my personal heroes and the economics genius on Fox News:

"Clearly, the gov's not a fan of Rush. But I suspect he is a fan of Rush's money. He's going to need it. And now he won't have it. And if other rich guys join Rush, guys like Donald Trump....he won't have a lot of it, or them.

Then what will become of the governor's millionaire tax for which $300,000 is enough to qualify? If you can't stick it to the rich who are bolting, how much lower on the financial food chain are you going to have to be moving? Because you better move fast, governor.

I suspect what happened with Rush won't stay with Rush. But the governor chooses not to pick a fight with Donald, just Rush. Even though others will be wandering, who have nowhere near the money of Rush.

But Governor Paterson, you don't see that. You see Rush. And you want the always compliant media to see Rush. And only Rush. And then laugh at Rush. And their hatred of Rush. And their love of anything hated by Rush.

If only they'd stop rushing to conclusions. Because this isn't about a broadcaster who could easily afford to keep a pad here but won't, but many who barely could and are wondering now if they will.

If they follow Rush, it won't be funny, governor. For you and your state, it won't be funny, at all.

Sad, yes. Funny, no."

He's exactly right. The very small number of rich people, both in New York and in the United States as a whole, bear the vast majority of the tax burden. The "poor" don't pay taxes. The more we tax the rich, the more ways they find to hide the money they have worked so hard to earn, and with which they pay their employees and manage their companies. Even when the rich don't leave to avoid the burden of taxes, if they stay they have to deal with the financial hit, which means they cut back on hours for their employees, lay people off, and raise prices in order to keep their company from going completely under. If we punish the part of the population that moves our economy, then we are dead in the water. Taxes hurt everyone. Say no to higher taxes!

I wish I could have gone to one of those tea parties.







By the way, even if you absolutely hate Rush Limbaugh and everything he stands for, this interview on Neil Cavuto's show should be very informative, even if all you get from it is an insight into how rich people think, which is helpful in understanding how harmful these taxes really are:






No comments: