We speak of “taxes” as if they are some magical entity that just appears in the coffers of the federal, state, or local government. And because of withholding, there’s little relation to how they appear. We seem to have lost connection to the fact that these funds are derived from our own personal wealth. And this is far from an accident. The whole purpose of withholding was to ensure the governed were able to meet their civic obligation. And since most individuals never see the employer’s matching, nor pays attention to anything beyond the take-home value, they’re completely oblivious to how much they really pay.
It’s also quite easy to manipulate the label. Promising to raise “taxes” on the well-to-do is much easier to float politically than to say outright that the government is going to use their police powers to confiscate a much larger portion of your paycheck. By tying the process to wealth envy – a trait commonly found in those who view themselves as victimized by the nebular rich – it becomes so easy for the legislative class to plunder the riches of its own people.
This is the way in which Democrats – and seemingly many Republicans these days – obtain and hold power. By promising presents to the “less fortunate”, they buy their positions with your money. And that’s the key point missing in the political training of our youth. These are not intangible “taxes”, it’s not a “contribution”, and there is no “investment”. Let’s call it what it is; our income forcefully taken to sustain the positions of an oligarchy. And what is even more ironic, is that through the privilege of the ballot, we have imposed this upon ourselves.
Granted, there is a need for public support of common infrastructure. The roads lead to nowhere if they fall into disrepair, and because we all use them, we are all accountable to maintain them. If we really want to live secure and free then raising and keeping a standing military is not an option, but a civic responsibility. And as Winston Churchill said, “It is government’s job to keep the trains running on time.” So there is a need for some degree and form of public payment. But where is the civic benefit in providing convenient birth control on demand, or removing the protective underpinnings of welfare reform? Each election cycle we keep letting government reach deeper into our pockets for their own benefit by ever-expanding the demographic freefall they have created.
There is an old saying that seems to have slipped from our collective memory. In my youth it was said that, “Only wealth can create wealth.” What was meant is that only the wealthy can make opportunity for themselves. Granted, it fostered wealth envy. But even then, it was never part of the concept that it was somehow morally proper, or even useful, to take income away from the wealthy and redistribute it to the poor on a cash basis.
Strangely enough, the truism should state that, “Only the wealthy can create opportunity.” You see, government can’t produce “wealth” for some by taking it away from others. All it can do is to foster opportunity for everyone, and those who find such advantages will certainly exploit them. But the result is that they also, in turn, create advantages for others. Wealth really does create wealth, but not from the aspect of taking it away from those who have it so we can give it to those who don’t. If we remove opportunity from the opportunistic, we ultimately stifle any potential for others to benefit.
For example, Bill Gates came from a reasonably comfortable family in Seattle. He worked hard in school and was accepted to Harvard. But that wasn’t what made him rich. Before completing his degree, Bill Gates dropped out of college to pursue an opportunity. He met a man who had developed a computer operating system, bought the rights to it, and then marketed his new product to perfection.
The end result was that I wouldn’t be able to write these words, nor would you be reading them, were it not for the entrepreneurial spirit of Mr. Gates. He’s one of the “filthy rich” because he saw an opportunity and exploited it to its fullest, and here we are benefiting from his wealth. And that doesn’t even begin to mention the thousands of employees directly related to Microsoft, nor the hundreds of thousands of retailers who also ride his coattails. In a personal sense, he has created an opportunity for me, and I am making the best of it.
Directly, he hasn’t handed either of us so much as a dime, yet we all benefit!
So you see, wealth is not in the physical dollars one holds in their hands. That is passing, and those who rely on handouts for their daily bread will never be able to grasp a decent living, let alone real wealth. Thus, increasing the dependency of the “less fortunate” by satiating them with the bread from other people’s sweat, only steals away our national dignity, and condemns us to mediocrity at best; enslavement at it’s most likely.
If we really want to help the poor; if we really want to lead the world as a great social and economic power; if we really want to give benefit to our fellow countrymen, then we really need to look more carefully at our sense of national pity. Instead, we should reserve a sense of empathy, and then to find solutions that incite opportunity in place of communal sympathy. Personally, I reject the term “less fortunate”, because it is rarely a case of misfortune that leads people down the path of self-destruction. Life in America is overwhelmingly a matter of one’s choices, as proven in the biographies of such people as Star Parker, Dave Thomas, Harland Sanders, and other self-made entrepreneurs.
What is their one common trait? They used their choices to find and exploit opportunity, and made of themselves something more than social services could ever have made of them.
If we can ever turn from feeling sorry for the poor to looking to their best benefit, then we can stop talking about raising “taxes” and can begin to look forward to increasing “opportunity”. Let’s call our present concept for what it is, “robbery”. Granted, it’s the government who is holding the gun to our heads and not the highwayman hiding in a dark ally. But the result is the same. Those who are unwilling to make a way for themselves are taking from the industrious by demanding payment and are offering nothing productive in return.
But this is far more insidious than simply fleecing the wealthy. It also steals one’s desire to seek opportunity, by both quenching immediate need, then penalizing the dependent for striving to reach out of their dependency. It is ultimately a trap that neither helps nor heals in the long-term, as well as dragging the rest of the nation behind it as one huge economic anchor chain tied to concept of public charity.
Why not give the poor their dignity instead, reduce our “contribution” to the level that supports the infrastructure, and make it economically viable for the rich to offer opportunity in place of simply seizing their income and passing it around? Why not make this nation a haven for industry, just the way our forefathers did? Create the right regulatory, educational, and tax environment for the “evil rich”, and you bet they’re going to get even richer. But as they do so, they would need help along the way. That help is called “opportunity”, by making jobs not welfare!
Stop teaching the poor how to stay poor, and start valuing and emulating our rich. They know the choices that lead to success, and they can teach us all how to grow toward greater freedom and the true fulfillment of our founder’s aspiration. Don’t envy them, emulate them! That’s how you really cure poverty.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Whether you agree or disagree, you're welcome to add your comment. All that is asked is that you be polite and at least partially intelligent.