Ya know, I think I finally figured out why I'm vehemently opposed to letting the Bush Tax cuts expire on top wage earners.
Now, I have never paid taxes in that bracket (okay, one year I did, but it was an extraordinary circumstance). During my best years, I came darned close. Now, I'm not even in the ballpark. I'm lucky to be eating a bratwurst at a tailgate party in the parking lot.
Here's what bothers me about it, though. I think our taxes are too high. If you have a good job and a good income, you're paying about half your money to the government. I don't care what your philosophy, but when 50 cents of every dollar you make goes to other people, I think that's crap.
I don't like the argument of, "oh, it only hoses over a few people, and not you! So, let's do it!" Using that logic, it'd be okay to grant civil rights to everybody except, say, Jews or black people. After all, it wouldn't affect me, personally. Hell, who cares if some black guy or jew doesn't get to vote. So long as I get to vote, screw them, right?
I think it's pretty easy to see the flaw in the "it only affects others, not you" argument when painted in that stark light. Taxes are too high. On me, on most people who pay taxes (only about half the wage-earners out there), and on people who make a lot more than me.
I believe that taxes should be lower, and government should be smaller, and there should be fewer people in the wagon and more people pulling.
So, to try to appeal to me by saying, "Well, it only affects other people, not you"... well... that sort of pisses me off. It's like saying it's okay to do a very bad thing so long as you promise only to do it to somebody else.
I'm also suspicious enough of the government to know that whey they say they're going to raise taxes on somebody else, that means they have the power to raise taxes on anybody and everybody. What I want is government that never raises taxes, ever, for any reason, and lowers them whenever possible.
There are practical constraints on this. I vote for school levies, for instance. However, as a principle, I want government that does what people are supposed to do: lives within its means.
It doesn't work if a person goes out, buys a yacht and a Lexus and supports their deadbeat relatives in a 5,000 square foot mansion, for them to then go to their employer and say, "hey, I need more money".
That's what the government is doing. Instead of saying, "Gee, we can't afford a Lexus and my deadbeat cousin needs to get his own place to live and find a job", the government is basically saying they love to spend, spend, spend, spend, spend, and to make that happen, people who work need a smaller and smaller piece of their own paychecks.
The other thing that bothers me, and I think this is one of those conservative / liberal litmus tests, is that I want to be wealthy one day. I am doing what I can to make that happen. I don't want incentives removed for this. I put everything I have on the line every day. I expect a reward when/if I start breathing the rare air of $250,000+ a year.
So, I don't care how many times they say that this only screws over a small amount of people. That's not good social policy. That's just divide and conquer: tell a majority that it's okay to screw over a minority. Our basic premises of civil rights are designed to protect us against the tyranny of the majority. As one person eloquently put it, majority rule is like two lions and a sheep deciding what they're going to have for lunch.
In any event, got a lot going on. Test in a few hours. I'm about 1/3 of the way through studying. Will go to school early and try to find a quiet place to finish.
I'm totally pumped to do my rowing machine workout today.
Gotta buy a bunch of stuff for my Dad's visit tomorrow. Need another bed and some food for the fridge.
Now, back to studying.
No comments:
Post a Comment