“This is America, the richest country in the world.” I hate that saying! I hear it often from those on the left, usually in defense of some half-baked plan to care for another down-and-out segment of society or to “give” some other entitlement to “all Americans.” There are two problems with this idea.

First, America is not rich. At least not America as the left usually defines it. You see the left sees the government as the great checkbook in Washington. They don’t understand that the government has no money and no source of producing it. I’m not talking about printing money because they can do that, but those greenbacks are only a symbol of someone’s tax burden. All wealth in this country is created by those who produce products—meaning anything of value: widgets, services, information, et al. The government pays for nothing and provides nothing. All they can do is redistribute wealth by taking it from those who earned it (and therefore deserve it) and give it to those who did not earn it (and therefore do not deserve it). The government does this through coercion. They come to your home or place of business and require that you report exactly how much money you have made and give them a proportional amount. This is acceptable when one considers what the government does appropriately. When the government spends seized money on the military it is protecting all of us from enemies. When they spend this money on police they are protecting us all from those who would steal and kill. Entitlements are a different story.

Government efforts to champion the poor by providing for the have-nots would be fine if they spent their own money, but all their money comes from us. They must first coerce it from the rightful owner before they can give it to another. Of course they take their cut off the top to finance the bureaucracy. This is actually theft because the person taxed loses money that he earned and gets nothing in return. Actually what the government does is far worse than simple theft. Robert Nozik (Nozick, 1974, p. 169) says, “Taking the earnings of n hours labor is like taking n hours from the person; it is like forcing the person to work n hours for another’s purpose.” This forced labor is, in effect, government sanctioned slavery. When you consider the money is given to those who did not work for it you can only conclude that the producer is made slave to the unproductive. Those who work hard to build wealth must work even harder to make up for what the government forces them to provide for those who choose not to work, or not to work as hard.

Second, with our progressive tax system no program benefits all Americans the same. Like I said taxation is appropriate for things that only the government can or should provide. We would not want private armies roaming the land or police working for the highest bidder so the government provides these and must tax to do so. However, when money is taken and nothing is given it is easy to see the wrong that is done. Lately, the problem is another type of entitlement. We are not faced with one that only benefits the poor but it is claimed that its implementation will benefit all Americans. The debate I am speaking of is healthcare. The plan, right now, is to create a government safety net for those without insurance, but the details put forth show a deeper desire to create a government program meant to spread and grow until its tentacles entwine all Americans. The final goal is a one-payer system in which all people will be on the government plan. Many see this as an acceptable use of tax power because those who pay the taxes will participate in the program—getting something in return. Actually, the problem with this view is that only those who work and can afford it will pay for the program that is meant to cover everyone. Those who currently pay for their own insurance and care will continue to do so, but they will send the check to the Federal government along with a hefty additional sum to cover their neighbor. This is not a program for all Americans but one more example of the productive subsidizing the unproductive.

This brings up a major problem to consider. With our progressive tax system, those who produce wealth pay for their own police and military protection and also for the protection of those who do not produce. This is still a subsidy of bad choices. The only fair tax is one that is totally flat and shared by all Americans, rich and poor, big and small alike. Any attempt at a graduated tax system gives higher value to some Americans by taking away from others.

America is not a rich country. Among the American people are rich and poor. Like all nations we only have the wealth produced by our people. Each American is entitled to the wealth he produces and none other.

Works Cited
Nozick, R. (1974). Aarchy, State, and Utopia. Basic Books.

To see someone struggling with Alzheimer’s is heartbreaking. For the person suffering the disease can make life a terror as they forget those who love them and familiar locations. Actions taken in the morning can be a total mystery by afternoon. What makes it saddest is the inability to control when it will hit, or what memories it will effect. This terrible disease is one of many nightmares that inspire fear about healthcare and bring on demands for reform. Unfortunately in American politics we see a form of political Alzheimer’s as office holders forget not only campaign promises, but also the arguments they once made as their position changes with the political winds.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is saying that we must take action to bring down the deficit if we want the economy to grow. In saying this, the call is on for higher taxes to pay for the misdirected stimulus spending. So deficit spending has gone from the answer to the problem in less than eight months. What about the harm that higher taxes would do to our economy. When you raise taxes you reduce the amount of money available for investment and business expansion. It was argued during the debate on stimulus that it would be paid for through an expanded tax base once we recover, but no new taxes would be needed. Of course anyone with half an understanding of economics knew this was half-baked at best and a blatant lie at worst. The opposition pointed out over and over that record spending matched with our current conditions would necessitate higher taxes.

It would be helpful if the Treasury Secretary would do some reading on economics and while he is at it perhaps a perusal of the Constitution.

Efforts to provide insurance coverage to all Americans sounds admirable. Speaking against the latest liberal efforts to extend such coverage is seen as hateful and uncaring. While no sane person wants another to suffer or die because of the cost of healthcare, we must ask what part of the Constitution gives Congress power to manage, or provide medical care for any Americans outside of the military. This element is being ignored by those who have taken oaths to support the Constitution.

This plan is blatant redistribution of wealth. As evidence of it, look at the various ways being considered to pay for this care. One of the latest is a tax on health policies costing $25,000 per year. This means that those who work hard and pay high premiums to get the best coverage would see their own health care costs to provide for others. “Soak the rich,” is a popular mantra of the left, but this promise must be viewed in light of history. Every government welfare program has started with taxes on the rich, but taxes always grow and the tax base always spreads.

Government provided healthcare, regardless of the method or the plan is an unconstitutional siezure and redistribution of wealth. Such programs subsidize bad decisions and punish productivity, while continuing to divide the nation along class lines.

We are hearing more details about Obama’s push to create the liberal Utopia where all needs are met by big brother and no one goes without. This week he is making a huge push for his healthcare plan. Like most things spawned from the Democratic side of the aisle it involves meddling in business, reducing freedoms and increasing dependence on Uncle Sam.

(more…)

Later this month one more liberal landmine is set blow another hole in our already frail economy. In 2007, shortly after the Democratic takeover of Congress, the minimum wage was raised. This act was praised by the media and their friends on the left as help for the poor. We were barraged for years with images of unfortunate people who could not earn a ‘living wage’ flipping burgers and mopping floors. The left claimed these people needed help and that everyone working full time deserved to earn enough to live on. So in charged the Cavalry, riding Democrat donkeys and Republican RINOs, defending the rights of the worker from the evil capitalists enslaving them. No longer would these people be taken advantage of, the liberals would see to that and Bush would sign the bill. To ensure future prosperity for these disadvantaged souls, Washington legislated regular automatic increases. One of these is set to go off on July 24.

(more…)

While Congress is away from Washington for the Fourth of July, President Obama replied to charges that his plans for healthcare reform were rushed and too costly. Of course, his reply was quintessential political boilerplate. He says “doing nothing would cost far more than changing the system.” He made no appeal to the need for change and no details of the changes or what we will get for our money–just an unprovable claim that doing nothing would be worse.

Take notice whenever a politician says that the expensive program he is touting is less costly than doing nothing. This is not an attempt to convince but to obfuscate. It is easy to point to statistics and stories of failings of our current system, because his own system has not been implemented and therefore is difficult to examine. Liberal programs are never measured by what they do or do not accomplish but by what they meant to accomplish. Welfare is a good thing because it meant to cure poverty. Never mind the destruction of minority families and the harm done by these programs.

The healthcare status-quo could never be more expensive than surrendering control of one-fifth of our economy to the government and control of our healthcare decisions to bureacrats. The cheapest healthcare system is one that allows market forces to determine costs, and that rewards creativity and innovation. Government healthcare will choke off innovation, will cost everyone in higher taxes and will drive market forces from the equation. Costs, procedures, and standards will be set by government fiat. Anyone who has experienced healthcare systems run by the US government (welfare systems, BIA Indian Health Services, Veterans Administration, etc.) wouldn’t wish that care on the rest of the country.

Recently the House of Representatives passed a huge tax bill masked as an energy plan. HR 2454, which none of the House read prior to the vote, adds artificial costs (just another form of tax) to energy production and distribution. The goal of the bill is to make green energy more palatable and competitive so that market conditions will coax the nation to develop and switch to these new technologies. This is sort of a round about way to answer the critics of green energy who say that these sources of energy are cost prohibitive and that the market does not want them. Rather than letting market forces work, Congress wants to make the energy we currently use so expensive that other sources will become magically attractive. This is in keeping with the motto of the Democratic party: “If you can’t beat them, tax them into submission.”

Unfortunately, certain Republicans in the House of Representatives thought that you and I do not spend enough on utilities and voted with the majority to dip into your wallet. It is my hope that the eight voting for the bill will face serious primary opposition and be removed from office next time around.

The eight who voted to raise the consumer’s cost of energy:

Mary Bono Mack (R CA)
Michael Castle (R DE)
Mark Kirk (R IL)
Leonard Lance (R NJ)
Frank LoBiondo (R NJ)
John McHugh (R NY)
Dave Reichert (R WA)
Christopher Smith (R NJ)

Barack Obama has found a source to fund his plans for healthcare reform and at least to hear it from him it will not involve a tax increase. He plans to “close loopholes” in the tax code and from the resulting funds, pay for nationalizing our healthcare. The lengths to which this administration will go even force the English language to bow to him is unbelievable. You see, raising taxes is unpopular, but tax loopholes for corporations and rich fat-cats are evil. There is a popular myth that corporations and the rich do not pay enough. Mr. Obama hopes to use the ignorance of the average American to get them to cheer his version of tax “Twister.” (more…)

Barack Obama has not even taken the oath of office but is already demanding Congress pass his economic stimulus plan. Of course when a liberal begins speaking of the economy everyone should reach for their wallet because the government, in good Keynesian fashion, will try to meddle the economy back into shape. When it comes to the economy the liberals only have one page in their playbook—expand government. (more…)