Captain Buzzkill
Sentinel
- Joined
- February 2, 2011
- Messages
- 476
This is why I talk about "overly entitled". Fair is bullshit. There is no fair, never has been, never will be. Arguably, there shouldn't be, but that's a rather philosophical discussion. But let's just go with "fair", whatever that is. By what right do you take from the rich that which they've earned (or their ancestors earned)? How can taking something from somebody that isn't yours be "fair"? Because you can? How does merely having the power to do something make it "fair"? Because you think they should? Because you want your pound of flesh and you want to use tax code to deliver your vengence? You're punishing an entire group of US citizens over the legal (albeit incredibly stupid, but still legal) actions of a very small few, and that's "fair"? It's highway robbery, plain and simple. The idea is to take something that isn't yours. There's simply no way to call that "fair", so it's pretty pointless to even bring that utterly subjective utopian hooey into the discussion, let alone use it as some sort of justification. Ultimately, you seem to think you're entitled to take something that isn't yours. Thus, my comment...
...I'd largely agree with the theory (that "obviously bear the burden" stuff is subjective and entitled, but the rest sounds pretty good) , but philosophically it's insane to think the American government, as representatives of American society, can manage this. We've got an overly-entitled society—people think the world owes them something and that it should be free for them to have it. Bull, but that's how people think. Nobody wants to earn anything and they do their damnedest to pull down anyone that actually gets off their ass and earns something.
Why would it be "fair" to collect taxes from them for any reason whatsoever? The majority of the money spent by the government is for programs that the wealthy don't need, so why tax them at all? Education, healthcare, and the military, to name a few examples off the top of my head. Rich people don't need to worry about any of these things, because they can afford whatever health care they need, they can go to the best private schools, and only the poor die on the battlefield. You call increasing taxation on the rich "highway robbery," and I ask you: In what way? Is a modest tax increase on those who have enough disposable income to buy shit like this really equivalent to cleaning out their bank deposit boxes, stealing their wives' pearl necklaces, and pistol whipping them for their watch? I understand that you engage in hyperbole to prove a point, but there's a big difference between getting the money that this country needs from the most obvious places, and killing the Tsar and his kids. Furthermore, you say that it's not "fair" to punish those who have legally and ethically earned their wealth for the misdeeds of a few, and then you go on to paint every person who uses some form of public assistance as an envious, lazy, mooch. How is your view of the "entitled" any more reasonable than my view of the "elite?" This constant "Pull Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps" argument totally ignores almost 100 years of social work and sociological research, and while we all get a warm and fuzzy hearing about someone who rose above his disadvantages and shortcomings and "done good" this kind of anecdotal evidence is wholly unrepresentative of reality. Without any direct evidence in front of me, I'm willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that the vast majority of people who utilize public assistance (or "entitlement" if you so prefer) programs are hard workers, are as self-reliant as they can possibly be, and are doing everything that they can to improve their station in a society as alienating as our own. I'm willing to accept that the vast majority of the wealthiest Americans have earned their riches through the sweat of their (or their granddaddy's) brow, if you're willing to accept that not everyone in an unemployment line or welfare office is a lazy, pot-smoking, reprobate with an angle on the system.
Yes, government bloat, mismanagement, and corruption definitely needs to be dealt with, as does the deficit and our flagging economy. However, as shitty and worthless as some of these government programs are, they are currently the only protections that the poor and disadvantaged have. If we're going to cause harm and distress to people by cutting funding to programs that they very well may need to survive, then I think it's only appropriate that we cause at least minor discomfort to people who are largely free from worry.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2011
- Messages
- 476