This is not a defense of the wealthy but a bit of information that most seem to forget. To begin with the top 10% of earners currently pay 71% of all taxes collected by the government. That's their share. The top 25% of earners pay 83% of all taxes collected. That's their share. The remaining 17% is collected from everyone else. And here's a shocker, last year 61% of the population paid no federal income tax at all! That is one hundred million families.
I present these facts just for informational purposes. I get tired tired of hearing that the wealthy should have to pay more, pay their fair share. I agree that everyone should pay their fair share. I don't see how what is currently being collected is fair. The only strictly fair system would have to be a flat tax. In that system everyone pays exactly the same percentage, no matter how much or how little they earn. The only issue there is in defining earnings. And that is why we have tax attorneys, accountants and entire industries surrounding just that. Even the wealthiest people, the billionaires, do not have oodles of cash on hand. They have potential. That is to say, they have stuff that is valued and could be sold for cash. Doesn't necessarily mean they will get it though.
How is it fair that the ones that do not contribute a thing to the tax collection plate, receive monetary benefits from that plate? The government is not a charitable organization and indeed, it shouldn't be. Benjamin Franklin famously said. "when the people find they can vote themselves money that will herald the end of the republic." Ben Franklin is correct and we can all see that happening right now. The only restraint on that, at the moment, is this division between parties. Indeed the Democrats would spend (vote) for an additional spending of over three trillion dollars! Fortunately, so far, there are Democrats unwilling to go along with that plan. The reason they are holding out may, or may not be to benefit the country.
The business of Government is to govern, not to issue charity. Charity is the business of individuals, based upon their moral code. One could argue that is one the reason behind the first amendment. There is the issue of Tithes. The Catholic Church suggests you give 10% of your income to support the church based on Biblical passages. I had that explained to me by a Catholic priest. It isn't a requirement, but it is highly encouraged. If the government endorsed Catholicism wouldn't it be highly encouraged to give 10% in support of the church? All denominations request tithes to support the church buildings and provide for the preachers, that sort of thing. Even running a charity isn't free. John Adams said, " Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people, it is wholly inadequate to the governing of any other." Why did he say that? Because the Constitution does not include any provisions for charity. That is up to the moral and religious people, not the government. In other words, the Constitution does not mandate you receive any money, services, or benefits that you have not earned. Charity. Yes, I know that is inconvenient, but that is the fact of the matter. All charity must be voted upon. Refer back to John Adams for that. Yes, those founding fathers were some pretty smart guys.
Now should we change that Constitution, amend it to include charity, that would indeed be the end of the Republic. If you read history you will notice the founding fathers always referred to the government as a Republic. In a Republic the people vote on and make the laws. All the people. That is the basis for our government. Now for practical reasons we have to elect representatives to cast our votes for the actual functioning of government. Still, it is our individual vote that gets that representative elected. That is the reason your vote is so important. We have never voted on the issuance of charity! Never. Our elected officials have never been given that authority. Yet, almost daily those representatives vote to issue charity.
Have the people discovered they can vote themselves money? Remember those representatives are the people! That is what they are representing. You. Many of those representatives leave that position having increased their personal wealth substantially. Voting themselves money? Perhaps it isn't always directly but nonetheless, it is effective. Like the wealth of those billionaires, it's on paper anyway.
The white house and capitol buildings are often called, the peoples house. Today they have erected a fence around that house. The "border" of that property is being guarded, patrolled and under surveillance. The question is, from whom? The people? And who is voting on admission to the peoples house? The representatives of the people? Are they one and the same?
Sixty one percent of the population paid no tax at all. One hundred million families. Are they dependent upon the government for their existence? No, the majority of them are not. It is estimated that 19% of the population currently receives welfare. They are dependent. They are also the ones lest likely to vote. But what about the other forty two percent that paid no taxes. They aren't dependent upon government, they just didn't contribute at all. They certainly enjoyed some of the benefits, services and privileges' afforded tax payers. But they utilized legal means to avoid that tax. Who voted on that? The people right, your representative. So, that means you did. And now you want to say, the ones already paying 71% of all taxes collected should pay more because that's fair? Well, all I can offer is this simple statement. Poor people never hired anyone to do anything. We can all be equally poor if that's what you vote for. Keep voting yourself money, that will end the republic.
No comments:
Post a Comment