an intellectually honest discussion: HIGHER TAXES DOESN’T ADDRESS WEALTH INEQUALITY

No – this isn’t going to be another conservative defense of “trickle down” economics.  My opposition to additional taxes has nothing to do with my desire to further sheild the rich from taxes in hopes that they may use that extra money in a way that will somehow benefit the rest of us.  Rather my oposition to taxes is a logical oposition to government and my lack of confidence in its ability or desire to use taxes to benefit the people.

We are a country with $15 trillion of national debt and growing.  We could increase the tax rate to 100% and still not pay that amount off in the next century.  The income the government does recieve is spent on an already bloated military to further expand our empire.  The military industiral complex, the corporations, and the politicians are the beneficiaries – NOT the people and especially not the poor.  Who are we kidding?

Perhaps an argument for higher taxes is based on good intentions, but it’s an illogical argument at best.  Those who argue for higher taxes are either in denial or totally ignorant of the government they trust.  People were disgusted with Mitt Romney’s astronomical income and seemingly low tax rat of 15% (still higher than 80% of America’s tax rate).  They ignore that Romney also gave about $7 million dollars to charity (about 15% of his income).  Who among us can say that?  I’m not defending Mitt Romney, but the point that I am trying to make is that charitable donations are far more efficient and effective in addressing the income inequality than giving more money to a government that has already shown they can’t be trusted to manage wealth.

Conservatives get a lot of grief for their distaste for taxes and government social programs.  Often getting the label of greedy and not understanding or empathizing with the poor, but I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of why fiscal conservatives think this way.  It is not our desire to keep the money from the poor and needy, but rather our desire to keep the money AWAY from the government.  A belief that additional taxes would be used to help anyone is a fallacy.  Additional taxes only serve to further chip away at the liberty of every American, expand our empire, wage wars, and pad the pockets of corporate politicians and lobbyist. 

If anything, higher taxes only kill the poor by aiding the government to wage and fund wars – where the poorest of our sons go to their slaughter to settle the agenda of the elite in this country.  Don’t be fooled – this is the cold sad truth – the faster we recognize it the faster we can change our way of thinking.  We can stop expecting the government to take care of us and our poor, we can stop passing the buck to our government, and take responsibility for this situation ourselves.  Lower taxes empower the people, not the super-rich. 

Warren Buffet once wrote a very popular article saying he wouldn’t mind being taxed more – I say keep the taxes – if you want to give more of your money – give it to a charity where it can be much better utilized.  His article was a brillian PR stunt, but a fantacy.  When has any rich man ever had a problem finding a way to give more of his money away?  If the government does’t want to take it – there are an infinite number of organizations who will.  If anything, his article was a perfect example of our over reliance on the government.

Look folks, the government already takes about 50% of our income (income tax, property tax, sales tax, etc.).  If they can’t make ends meet with half of the country’s wealth then they aren’t doing something right.  The answer is far more simple and MORAL than raising taxes.  Stop waging war, stop expanding the empire, and spend that money on the people who need it.  The country would be that much more peaceful and well fed.


7 thoughts on “an intellectually honest discussion: HIGHER TAXES DOESN’T ADDRESS WEALTH INEQUALITY

  1. jon

    Really good defense of lower taxes. I get it. I think that for us to become confident in government spending (and some things make sense to make public, I think, like highways, basic science research, keeping food safe to eat and air safe to breath, education accessible to anyone with the drive to educate themselves, etc…) — either the government needs to convince us that tax money won’t be inefficiently spent, or in cases where it is being well administered, making these successes clear to the public (e..g, i think the NIH works really well from what I can see; I’m on an NIH panel and am impressed by how seriously the scientists on the panel take their responsibility of identifying the strongest scientific research proposals based on merit alone; it’s done with time-efficiency, no frills; serious business).

    If we were confident that inefficiency were being eliminated, we’d feel better about paying taxes, whatever the rate. And like you say, that means identifying things that really would be better dealt with privately and only spending government money on things they can best deal with.

    1. Atticus Finch

      Yeah, I’m sure many programs are well run, but before the government can ask for even more money they need to show the people that they are going to get a bang for their buck. However, I’m not sure they could demonstrate that effectively in the next decade.

  2. Pingback: Limited Government « BlogTruth

  3. Pingback: Big Government, Big Consequences « BlogTruth

  4. Pingback: Why Taxation is Necessary « BlogTruth

  5. Pingback: Best of 2012 – January « BlogTruth

  6. Pingback: Taxes, Bankruptsy, and the Future of the American Economy | BlogTruth

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s