The Question Of Freedom

The most distressing part of this election cycle is the class warfare.  While Democrats have long beat the drum of taking from the rich because they can afford it, the average American still believes that what you work for, you keep.

In this campaign, Obama's version of Christianity is that the rich should be forced to give their money to those less fortunate, and they should be happy about it because it's brotherly.  Never mind that Christianity never talks about the virture of giving charity from someone else's money.

In the actual words of Obama, Frank, Biden, Reid, Pelosi, Clinton and other leading Democrats, the rich need to pay more because they "can."  In the words of @trianglman, the rich won't feel it much, so it makes sense to force ask them to pay more. 

That's tyranny, plain and simple. There's no difference between a king, a slave master, or the federal government in taking private property from one group and giving it to another.  It is the death of free men, and ostensibly it's what we've been fighting for since 1776. 

This is a poisonous idea, and it's the primary reason I engage in the political process.  Western Civilization is no accident.  As a system, it relies on the basic goodness and hard work of the average citizen to survive.  If we aren't all doing out part, it crumbles.  Considering that the virtues of our system, and indeed the definition of what it takes to be a good citizen is no longer taught in the schools, the danger that we lose everything that we have has never been so great.

Will Obama ruin the US?  Of course not.  Even if he is as bad as the worst conspiracy nut thinks, Obama's damage would be limited simply because Americans are tougher than one silver-tongued poser.  But Obama's election, along with that of the Democratic House and Senate, could put in place structrural impediments to freedom and prosperity that could take a generation to repair.  And there's no guarantee they can be repaired.

The Republican Revolutions in 1980 and 1994 failed.  They halted the trend of progressive governance, but they didn't reverse it.  While preventing the worse excesses of socialist thought, the Republicans were unable to actually cut the size of government, and under George Bush, turned into a big government party.

This is why Obama isn't really a transformational figure.  If the country now believes that government should be in charge of everything, it won't matter who vote into office.  The path to decline will have set in, and no leader will stop it.  That doesn't mean the election of Obama is the end of things.  There are a lot of disillusioned Republicans, independents who want to believe in something positive, and Democrats who will recover from Bush Derangement syndrome and bring their party back to the center.

6 months of Barry and the Jets ought to do just fine for curing that ill. 

The question in front of us as a country is whether the government is the correct answer to the questions of healthcare, retirement, business, and "fairness."  To a large extent, that question has been answered, and it's "mostly."  When I vote for McCain/Palin this year, it won't be because I'm a big fan of McCain (Campaign Finance/Immigration/Judges), it will be because the two of them are clearly in the right camp of individual responsibility, personal optimism, and yes, freedom.

In terms of philosophy, the two parties are clear.

Republicans are okay with rich people making money and keeping it.  So am I.  The reason is simple.  As long as criminal activity isn't taking place, it doesn't bother me if rich people have money, even if they have a lot more money.  I know from personal experience that making money is difficult.  More power to them. 

Democrats don't think it's fair to have income inequality.  Obama's famous statement trumpeted by the press in the primary on capital gains taxes was instructive.  Even though the government brings in more money with a lowered capital gains tax, he thinks fairness is a better measure of where we place the rate.  It's not about prosperity, it's about fairness.

The problem with fairness, as so eloquently laid out by Margaret Thatcher in the 80's, is that everyone makes do with less.  The government is incapable of bringing long-term prosperity.  Set aside windfalls like oil and natural resources, and no socialist government in the world has brought prosperity to its people.

Chavez is finding that out.

And of course the real concern, is that once you count on the government to help you, you lose the muscles to help yourself.  Ask the victims of Katrina how they feel about government protecting them. 

Here's where I stand. Choose.  Choose to be a success, or a sheep.  If you want Obama, or some other messianic figure to descend from the clouds and make something happen, you are deluded, or you are dangerous. If you are deluded, I will use this blog and other means to show you the truth.  If you are dangerous, I will point out your perfidy to the world, exposing your weakness and your methods.

I am a success.  I am a winner.  No matter what challenges or pitfalls I encounter, my success is assured.  I will never quit.  I will never take handouts in return for political power.  I will never believe that politician with promises can deliver a better future than my own two hands.

No matter what race or religion or party they come from.

Comments

[Gabe]

Devoid of fact. Democrats improve the economy far more people than do Republicans. It is a fact - not an opinion. See http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1021/p09s01-coop.html

Progressive tax schemes are not socialism - look up the definition of socialism. The government bailout was socialism. Government owning industry is socialist, asking the rich to pay more in taxes is progressive and morally justified.

Inherited wealth means unchecked capitalism cannot provide equal opportunity or economic freedom. Only by by taxing can we provide education and other tools of wealth. That we are all born with the same chance to live the American dream is a myth. Simple research on how difficult and rare it is to move up classes will prove this point true.

You make base arguments that do not account for the way economic freedom is already limited in a nation were wealth is heavily concentrated at the top. Why do people like Joe the Plumber worry about a tax increase in a hypothetical world were they actually make $250,000.000? Got news for Joe - most likely it's not gonna happen. If you make to 250k then you will be very well off and can afford to pay more taxes than if you made $40,000.00 and you should feel good that your success can help the government of the people by the people pay for better, schools, roads, defense and the like.

And Warren Buffet, who is taxed at 15% in capital gains, says the rate should go up because he ends getting taxed less than his secretary. That is UNFAIR and should be changed - just ask Warren Buffet.

[Jim Durbin]

1) The US is the most fluid society in the world for wealth creation and movement between the classes. No one else in history comes close.

2) The potential to make that move is there. Is it hard? Yes. That's why most people can't do it. I find your comments that Joe can't to be offensive, and typical of people who won't succeed, and thus don't want anyone else to succeed.

3)Inherited wealth? We just passed Europe for number of millionaires this decade.

4) Wealth is always concentrated at the top. The question is who controls - the state, or individuals. I prefer individuals to have it, as they can't kick my door in and haul me off to jail.

5) Common ground! You keep taxes to schools (just math, reading, and science, please), roads and defense, and I'll vote for you for any office.

But that's not what the money is spent on.

6) Warren Buffett is the richest man in the world, and he gets to choose where and how he pays taxes. Read below for how Buffett's complaints about his secretary's taxes are bogus.

[Gabe]

1) The US is the most fluid society in the world for wealth creation and movement between the classes. No one else in history comes close.

It is becoming less fluid as the rich-poor gap grows. The Philadelphia Inquirer has a story today quoting an OCED study that’s says wages have stagnated for 27 out of 30 people in the US – and grown substantially for the 3 in 30. That is not mobility and our middle class is eroding under Republican tax schemes.

2) The potential to make that move is there. Is it hard? Yes. That's why most people can't do it. I find your comments that Joe can't to be offensive, and typical of people who won't succeed, and thus don't want anyone else to succeed.

Joe should be more worried about his taxes NOW. Not in some magical world where he gets a license to plumb and runs an incredibly successful small business. This, “you don’t want people to succeed” stuff misses the point. Everyone wants to succeed and make tons of money – but only 5% of the country actually does and I have no problem taxing them progressively. When people like Joe think of future/potential earnings instead of their real pay check in evaluating tax schemes we elect George Bush and the rich get richer. It is a trick I won’t fall for.

3)Inherited wealth? We just passed Europe for number of millionaires this decade.

That doesn't answer the philosophical argument about inherited wealth. Money creates money. Even if someone did not inherit all their wealth, their beginning in life is typically aided by privilege. The system of capitalism has an inherent flaw because of inherited wealth, which justifies progressive tax schemes.

3) Wealth is always concentrated at the top. The question is who controls - the state, or individuals. I prefer individuals to have it, as they can't kick my door in and haul me off to jail.

This argument conflates progressive tax scheme with police and legal power. People controlling money as individuals still happens under a progressive tax scheme. The government takes a larger piece – true – but once you make a million dollars a year your quality of life is really good –you don’t need more money. However, millions of kids need better schools, we need an investment in renewable energy, our infrastructure is crumbling and we are fighting two. If you want limited powers to kick – in your door, turn your attention to banning elements of the Patriot Act.

Additionally, just because money has always been concentrated at the top doesn’t mean it should. The most essential component of strong country is a strong middle class. I want to see the middle class grow and the ridiculously rich shrink.

5) Common ground! You keep taxes to schools (just math, reading, and science, please), roads and defense, and I'll vote for you for any office.
But that's not what the money is spent on.

I know politics causes spending to take terrible turns, but the GOP has been power most likely to block investment in education at the federal level, while pouring money into Iraq. It was FDR was helped build national infrastructure and create jobs.

I think it goes little beyond those areas – I would include health care – but I don’t believe in funding every program out there. But with our massive deficit we are going to ne need tax increases to fund new investments in education and infrastructure.

6) Warren Buffett is the richest man in the world, and he gets to choose where and how he pays taxes. Read below for how Buffett's complaints about his secretary's taxes are bogus.

His argument is that when you add FICA and everything else, which he does not pay under capital gains, she is taxed at 30 percent – and he should know – he did her taxes.

[Curtis]

To become really wealthy (that is to be in the top 10% that controls 90% of the worlds wealth) generally requires to be born in to it. Or at least be born close to it and then get very lucky. I don't care how hard you work everyday. If you have over 250 million dollars of personal assets, that is obscene when compared to the hundreds of thousands who are also working very hard and can not afford healthcare for their children or a home for their family. I really don't know what is fair... but I know completely unchecked greed is not benefiting the world.

The idea that if you work very hard you will become rich and successful is total illusion. I know hundreds of people all working very hard who are not now and will never reach that 10%. The ones that are very rich will all tell you they got lucky--they got in at the right time and the right place. Being wealthy is more of a Lottery than a career path. The reality here is that a Democratic government is going to have no impact on people's ability to work hard or get lucky. Perhaps some folks in the upper 20% will pay some more taxes. This will have no impact on 80% of Americans and only little impact on the 20%. The top 5% won't pay a dime more.

The only question in the election is to consider how terrible things have turned in the last 8 years. Do you continue on that path with the same party of the same ideals and same policies? How many decades of corruption, greed, violence, ignorance, zealotry, sexual depravity and utter lies must we tolerate before we say that the Republican party is broken?

[Jim Durbin]

Curtis, remind me never to offer you a job.

Or hire you to do one for me.

I don't hire losers who believe they can't succeed in life.

Also - you need some perspective in politics, because you've lost yours. Maybe it's in your congressional freezer with your $80,000 in cash? Or in a prostitution ring with Mafia ties? A love child with a campaign worker? Or perhaps with a Florida politician who used campaign cash to pay off a former mistress? Maybe in a Chicago home purchased by a soon to be convicted Chicago moneyman? Maybe it's in the tens of millions in illegal foreign contributions accepted by the Obama campaign?

But just one party has the problem.