Using Class Warfare to raise the Debt Limit while the Chinese Love Chairman Mao

Posted by PITHOCRATES - July 16th, 2011

You just don’t create more Jobs by Raising Taxes

Long story short the economy sucks.  And it’s not getting better anytime soon (see Number of the Week: 5% Unemployment Could Be Over a Decade Away by Justin Lahart posted 7/16/2011 on The Wall Street Journal).

162: Number of months it would take at this year’s pace of job growth for unemployment rate to fall to 5%.

That’s 13 and a half years of more of the same.  High unemployment means fewer taxpayers.  This does not bode well for our current debt crisis or that out of control government spending.  Which has all of Washington in a panic as they desperately try to get the Republicans to cave and increase the debt limit so they can borrow more. 

Obama and the Democrats want tax hikes.  To take more from those who work.  The Republicans want to go the route of making more taxpayers (i.e., create more jobs).  And you just don’t create more jobs by raising taxes.  Unless you live in fairyland.

‘Shared Sacrifice’ means Taxing the Wealthy More

But the spending is so out of control and the economy so bad that the Obama administration is desperate for new taxes.  They’re willing to offer any deal.  And tell any tall tale (see Obama appeals to middle class on debt talks; GOP touts balanced budget by the CNN Wire Staff posted 7/16/2011 on CNN).

Obama cited budget deals forged by President Ronald Reagan and Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill and President Bill Clinton and Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich.

“Nobody ever got everything they wanted,” Obama said. “But eventually they worked together, they moved this country forward…”

“We’ve been down this road before,” he said. “In 1990 Congress and the president struck a deficit reduction deal that combined spending cuts with tax increases. Unfortunately, while the tax hikes remained, the spending restraint did not, and our debt has marched higher.”

There’s a little history revisionism.  The Democrats got their tax hikes.  And screwed Republicans on the spending cuts.  The infamous $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in new taxes promise in the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982Tip and his Democrats reneged on that promise.  Just like the Democrats did on their 1990 promise. 

‘Working together’ to Obama means to do what the Democrats want and to stop being a pain in the ass.  So you can understand why the Republicans are a little gun-shy when it comes to making deals with them that require trust.  Because they have a history of being untrustworthy.

Evoking compromises of the past, President Barack Obama said Saturday that a commitment to shared sacrifice can break the current impasse on the debt ceiling…

He used his address to reach out to the middle class, reiterating his call for higher taxes on the wealthy and reforms to politically popular entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security. “We are all part of the same country. We are all in this together…”

One of the issues at heart of the current debate is Obama’s call for more tax revenue by allowing tax cuts from the Bush presidency to expire at the end of 2012 for families making more than $250,000. His plan would keep the lower tax rates for Americans who earn less.

Obama noted earlier this week he is not looking to raise any taxes until 2013 or later. In exchange, the president said, he wants to ensure that the current progressive nature of the tax code is maintained, with higher-income Americans assessed higher tax rates.

Shared sacrifice?  Higher taxes on the wealthy?  Clearly that’s not shared sacrifice.  That’s making the wealthy pay more.  Even though they are already paying a lot.  In fact, any poor person who wins the lotto will be shocked to see how much they will owe in taxes.  Say you won a million dollar jackpot.  Per the 2010 federal income tax table, you’ll owe $327,643.75.  Not to mention state or local taxes.  You’ll be lucky to keep half of your winnings by the time you’re done paying your taxes.  Is that fair?  If it’s you, no.  If it’s the ‘rich’ and you’re not rich, sure.  Why not?  Classic class warfare.  And it’s exactly what the Democrats are banking on.  

A Warm Love for Chairman Mao

And speaking of class warfare, you know who else is good at it?  The Chinese communists.  And it starts by indoctrinating their children (see Red State by Hannah Beech posted 7/16/2011 on Time).

Twelve-year-old Chen Le is a typical Chinese kid. He loves flying paper airplanes, plays Ping-Pong and dreams of becoming a scientist. And he aims one day to join the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) so, as Chen puts it, “I can puff out my chest and say I am a party member…”

…Then there’s the Red Army school program, which uses donations and other funds to instruct 1.15 million kids in academies named after the communist militia. “Our patriotism classes are even more patriotic than those of normal schools because loving our country is very important for our current society,” says Fang Qiang, the secretary-general of the National Red Army Construction Project Council. “Our students all have a warm love for Chairman Mao.”

A warm love for Chairman Mao?  Interesting.  Talk about history revisionism. 

[The] red revival is facing something of a backlash. For some Chinese, the color red brings back the bad memories of the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution, when frenzied Red Guards rampaged nationwide. The resurgent glorification of Mao, who even staunch supporters have grudgingly labeled “70% right and 30% wrong,” has alarmed others. As the red-culture campaign reached a crescendo this spring, economist Mao Yushi of Beijing think tank Unirule Institute of Economics wrote an online essay blaming Mao for overseeing the deaths of some 50 million Chinese. The Great Helmsman was “a backstage orchestrator who wrecked the country and brought ruin to the people,” the academic wrote. Censors quickly purged his comments.

There wasn’t a whole lot of love for Mao when he was killing those 50 million Chinese.  Just a lot of fear.  And suffering.  As China reformed and purged the rich and made everyone equal.  And poor.  And now the young are singing patriotic songs about the world’s greatest mass murderer.  To help keep everyone patriotic.  So they don’t see the rich getting richer.  And the poor staying poor.

For a nostalgic faction in the Chinese leadership, it is the market-oriented economic reforms of Mao’s successor Deng Xiaoping — which turned China into the world’s factory — that are responsible for having allowed ills such as graft and income inequality to flourish. In national surveys from 2005 onward, Chinese have expressed progressively less satisfaction with their lives, even as their incomes have surged. “We can’t stop divisions in society completely, but we can try to lessen the pain,” says Fang Ning, director of the Institute of Political Science at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing. “The central theme of red culture is to promote unity and equality in society. China has had economic growth. Now we want to pay attention to social growth as well.”

After some spectacular growth caused by allowing a little capitalism in, they will now be paying attention to social growth.  Much like in the United States.  And we see what that did for the Americans.  A 15 year or so recession.  And a debt crisis.  Which is now coming to China.  Who are no strangers to income redistribution.  Been there.  Done that.  Under Chairman Mao.  During his Great Leap Forward.  Which was more central planning disaster than moving the country forward.  In fact, it was capitalism that finally did move China forward.  As it moved America forward.  Until the Americans focused on social growth.   

If history repeats, as it usually does, perhaps their future will be our present.  Where they will be making speeches about shared sacrifice.  To avert a disaster.  And keep the peace.  Or they could just send the tanks in.  Which have proven to be pretty effective in shutting down an unhappy opposition.

Income Inequality sure pays the Tax Bills

The American economy won’t be getting better anytime soon.  Thanks to excessive government spending and debt.  Which the Obama administration is going to ‘fix’ by borrowing and spending more.  And increasing taxes.  Things that aren’t known for creating jobs.  Which is what we need.  Like in China.  They have a lot of them.  And see how well they’re doing?  They’re getting so rich that they have to get their young to sing patriotic songs to hide the income inequality.  So they don’t grow up and become dissidents.

Say what you want about income inequality, but it sure pays the tax bills.  China is buying U.S debt. The United States isn’t buying Chinese debt.  That should tell you a thing or two about letting the rich get rich.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #66: “In socialism you don’t get what you want. You settle for what you get.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 17th, 2011

Beggars can’t be Choosy

Imagine if you will some outdoor summer event.  By the lake.  Or the beach.  Someplace nice.  But a long way from any restaurants or stores.  It’s a day of fun and games enjoyed by all.  A rather long day at that.  And the people get hungry.  Lucky for them there’s food.  Over at the concession area there are two lines.  One long.  One short.  At the long line it says free food.  The short line says $250 per plate. 

There are also menus.  For $250 per plate you can get almost anything you want.  New York strip steak.  Crab legs.  Lobster tails.  BBQ ribs.  Corn on the cob.  Baked potatoes.  You name it and it’s there.  The free line is serving watery, lukewarm macaroni and cheese.  And they make it with an artificial cheese product.  One cup per person.  It tastes horrible.  But, hey, it’s free.  And you know what they say?  Beggars can’t be choosy.  Oh, and they run out before everyone is served.

Now everyone would rather have the steak, ribs, crab, lobster, etc.  But not everyone can afford $250 per plate.  Or wants to pay.  Some say it’s not fair.  But the people enjoying their steak aren’t complaining.  The line’s short.  And there’s plenty of food for them.  It’s just those who can’t or don’t want to pay the $250 per plate that complain.  Because they not only want something for free, they want something good as well.  But life doesn’t work that way.  Because everything costs.  And it’s just too expensive to give away steak, ribs, crab, lobster, etc.  But by selling these at a high price allows them to give away the macaroni and cheese to everyone else.  Which allows everyone to eat.  Until they run out.

As an interesting exercise, substitute ‘health care’ for ‘food’ in the above exercise.

The Free Market is most Efficient 

We can get a broad understanding of economics from this example.  In free market capitalism you can pretty much buy whatever you can afford.  Innovation and the profit incentive provide a lot of competition for your money.  Giving you a lot of choices.  There’s always a new company out there saying, “Hey, look at me!  Look at the new thing I have to sell!”  And if we like what we see we just may buy it.  Perhaps making another millionaire entrepreneur in the process.  While making our life better to boot.  Not too shabby.  This would be the ‘short’ line in our example.

Socialism is a command economy.  ‘Smart’ government bureaucrats direct the economy to maximize market efficiency.  And its objective is egalitarianism, not profits.  Because people should come before profits.  So the socialists decide who gets what resources and what prices should be.  Of course, when you do this, ultimately someone has to decide for the masses.  Because you can’t put 60 million people into a room and ask them what they want.  Sports cars or fuel efficient hybrids?  More tractor parts or more toilet paper and soap?  Grain crops used for food or fuel?  So not only do they decide how to do things more efficiently, they decide our choices for us as well.  This would be the ‘long’ line in our example.

In our example, the free market capitalists are happy.  And sleepy after eating a huge and delicious meal.  The socialists on the other hand are not so happy.  The food wasn’t that good.  And they had to ration it at the end of the day to feed everyone.  And yet they still ran out before everyone ate.  And this happened why?  Because it is the free market that is most efficient.  Not the command economy.  The free market is what fills up store shelves with things we want to buy at affordable prices.  Not the command market of socialism.  If you don’t believe me, talk to someone who lived in the Soviet Union.  Ask them what was on their store shelves.  They probably saw more tractor parts (which they didn’t want to buy) than toilet paper or soap (which they did want to buy).

Egalitarianism leads to Low Quality and Rationing

In theory, socialism sounds wonderful.  Egalitarianism.  Income redistribution.  From those according to ability to those according to need.  Sticking it to the rich.  What’s not to like about that?  I mean, if you’re not rich.  And that’s the catch.  Rich can be a relative term.  If someone has more money than you they’re rich and should pay more in taxes.  And those who make less than you will feel the same way about you.  Which, of course, you’ll probably reply by saying something like, “Hey, wait a minute.  I’m not rich.”  But anyone poorer than you would disagree.

So the middle class will only want to tax the ‘rich’ rich.  And the poor will all be for taxing the middle class and the rich.  Ultimately, though, because there are so many ‘poor’, you have to tax the middle class in any income redistribution scheme.  Because even though the middle class is far from being rich, they are far more numerous.  And the numbers add up. 

Besides being taxpayers, the middle class and rich also have something else in common.  Jobs.  The rich provide startup capital for new businesses.  That creates jobs.  And the middle class start up most small business.  And they, too, create jobs.  In fact, small business creates the majority of the jobs.  So high taxes on these people provide a disincentive to do what they do best.  Create.  Jobs.  And things people want to buy.  So higher taxes reduce incentive.  And this reduces economic output.  Less stuff on the market means higher prices.  Lower quality.  Or simply less stuff.

Some People are more Equal than Others

And this is why beggars can’t be choosy.  Egalitarianism sounds nice but there is only one way to achieve it.  You can’t give everyone steak.  It’s just too costly.  So you give everyone watery, lukewarm macaroni and cheese.  Everyone is equally miserable.  And hungry.  But you don’t complain.  Because it is either that.  Or nothing.  Unless you’re part of the inner circle.  The ruling elite.  For them there is always steak and lobster.  For it’s a small price to pay for all the selfless service they do giving us our egalitarian society.  They have a lot of stress in their life optimizing market efficiency.  So they need a little pick me up.  I mean, who could begrudge them fine steak and caviar after all they’ve done for us?

Socialism is not about market efficiency.  It’s about lowering quality (to make things cheaper).  And rationing.  So you can try to spread less stuff around to more people.  But taxing the creators raises costs.  And reduces economic output.  Which means there is less stuff to distribute to the people.  Which means they have to raise taxes to keep giving the people the same stuff.  Or reduce the quality further.  Or ration more.  It’s an endless downward spiral. 

And once you’re in the system, you are dependent on the system.  You beg and plead for less rationing and cuts but to no avail.  Sure, there’s enough steak for the ruling elite, but not for everyone else.  So there has to be fair-shared sacrifice.  By everyone.  Everyone that’s not in government, that is.  For in an egalitarian society, all people are equal.  Only some are more equal than others.  (A little George Orwell there.)

As an interesting exercise, substitute ‘health care’ for ‘food’ in the above exercise.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #58: “Presidents with aggressive domestic agendas tend to have inept and naïve foreign policy.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 22nd, 2011

Feeding their Egos with Illusions of their own Grandeur

First there were progressives.  Then there were liberals.  Self-proclaimed super geniuses.  Regular Wile E. Coyotes.  Smarty-pants know-it-alls.  You can’t tell them anything.  Because they know everything.  While you aren’t even smart enough to know what’s good for you.  But that’s okay.  Because they have taken it as their personal mission in life to run our lives.  To protect us from ourselves.  To tell us what to eat.  What to drink.  How to raise our kids.  How to educate them about the important things in life.  Fairness and multiculturalism.  Not math and science.  They teach us about the evils of greed.  Our greed.  Not theirs.  They can keep raising taxes to take our money so they can play with it.  But if we complain they say we hate teachers.  And children, of course.

These people start their government careers in the Ivy League.  Where they don’t learn anything useful.  They get law degrees.  Or some degree in the social sciences.  Public policy.  Philanthropy.  Degrees where they learn how to take other people’s money without providing anything useful in return.  All the while feeding their egos with illusions of their own grandeur.  They develop the cutting edge of progressive/liberal thought.  Most of it nonsense to you and me.  But in their little Ivy League world they’re saving the world.  Even though they have no idea of how the world works.  Understand things economic.  Or the role of energy in a developed economy.  They haven’t the foggiest idea about any of these things.  But they feel that only they are qualified to regulate these things.  Because they care about us.  And the planet.  Not profits.

Liberals are also not the manliest of men.  They get in touch with their softer, feminine side.  Get in touch with their feelings.  Some even cry.  Cowboys they’re not.  They’re into conflict resolution by diplomacy and timeouts.  They can be mean and nasty.  Partake in some of the worse character assassination.  But never alone.  Or without the power of the state to protect them.  You won’t see them get into any fights.  Because when it comes to actual fisticuffs, they’re not as brave as their words.  They’re the worse of bullies.  Weaklings that have others bully for them.  That’s why these people watch soccer instead of football.  Why they don’t hunt.  Why they hate the military.  They don’t like any manly behavior.  Or manly men.  No doubt from growing up in a childhood full of wedgies and swirlies.

Big Government and High Taxes

Much of a progressive’s/liberal’s life is spent getting even.  And the best revenge is living well.  And they sure do that.  Live well.  Better than most of us.  And with our money.  Either money gained through some frivolous lawsuit.  From the ‘overhead’ costs of the charitable organizations they ‘work’ for.  (Some keep more than 50% of all donations for their ‘operating’ expenses.  While the new healthcare legislations allow insurers to use no more than 20% of their premiums on their operating expenses.  How’s that for fair?)  High taxes.  Or kickbacks from the industries they regulate.

Those in government hate those in business.  Just like they hate the jocks and bullies in high school who tormented them.  But they hate business people for a different reason.  Because they have talent.  They’re able to create something people willingly pay for.  They can’t.  Of course they can play god over these people who have talent.  And they do.  Which makes up for their feelings of inadequacy.  It’s sort of a love-hate relationship.  They love taking their profits.  But they hate them because they have profits.

People need to feel a purpose.  And so it is with progressive/liberals.  Sure, having our money is good, but floating through life in the lap of luxury leaves them with an empty feeling.  Normal people may feel guilt over taking so much of our money. They just feel bored.  Like rich kids who get in trouble because they have too much time on their hands.  Bored rich kids get in trouble.  Bored liberals write legislation.  Exploit class warfare.  And go about redistributing our wealth.  They take money from the ‘rich’ people who have jobs or own businesses and give it to the needy.  And the more of these people you support with other people’s money, the more they will keep voting for you.  This allows the liberal to live a long life in politics.  Strokes their ego.  And fills that empty feeling they have from being the worthless waste of spaces they are.  And this is why they do what they do.  Keep government big.  And taxes high.

Projecting Force to Protect National Security Interests 

Liberals want power.  They want to expand government.  And expand the welfare state.  They always have big plans when they run for office.  They are never content to sitting back and let the free market work.  Because that’s no fun.  They want to control that market.  Using some bad economic theory (i.e., Keynesian Economics), they do.  They say it’s to make the markets more efficient.  But that’s not the reason.  It’s the power.  The getting even.  And getting their hands on all of that money. 

When presidents come out of the Ivy League, their heads are filled with a lot of progressive/liberal thoughts.  Ideas about income redistribution.  Fairness.  Multiculturalism.  But little about business.  Or the real world.  And as leader of the free world, that can be a problem.  Constitutionally speaking, the president’s responsibility is the real world.  The president is the commander in chief of the armed forces.  The president treats with foreign nations.  And appoints and receives ambassadors.  Nowhere in the Constitution will you see the president being responsible for income redistribution for fairness in a multicultural welfare state.

When a president goes in with an aggressive domestic agenda he comprises his Constitutional responsibilities.  It’s like a kid playing video games instead of doing his homework.  It’s fun.  But there is a cost.  The U.S. is a superpower.  And leader of the free world.  The president’s tools include military force, foreign aid and diplomacy.  And a powerful domestic economy that makes all of this possible.  If a president focuses on domestic policy over his foreign policy, both suffer.  The high taxes reduce economic activity.  Which reduces tax receipts.  And this makes budget deficits.  The progressive/liberal will not want to cut the domestic spending.  So they cut military spending and transfer it to the domestic side.  And borrow money.  Or print it.  Weakening both the military.  And the economic well being of the nation.  Which weakens the president’s ability to project force to protect national security interests. 

An Inconvenient Truth:  We Need Oil Flowing at Market Prices  

Of course, with the liberals’ disdain for the military and the military industrial complex, they don’t care.  They don’t believe there are any dangers out there.  And, if there are, it’s because we brought them upon ourselves.  For being bullies.  I mean, who are we to be a superpower and leader of the free world?  That’s just sticking our nose into other people’s business.  It’s time we stop.  Let other people live their lives.  Besides, it’s a different world today.  We don’t need standing armies or aircraft carriers.  Who’s going to invade us?

True, the chances of a D-Day type invasion landing on our shores is remote.  But there are other ways to attack our country.  9/11 comes to mind.  And there is economic warfare.  Have you enjoyed the Great Recession, the greatest recession since the Great Depression.  Probably not.  Do you remember how it started?  With $4/gallon gasoline.  Do you remember how horrible that was?  People were demanding Congress do something about it.  Amazing, isn’t it.  How high gasoline prices can trigger a recession (of course, the subprime mortgage meltdown changed that recession into the Great Recession).  Keeping oil flowing at market prices, then, is a U.S. national security interest.  Because a spike in gasoline prices will crash the healthiest of economies into recession.  Of course, this goes contrary to everything a progressive/liberal holds true.  But it’s an inconvenient truth they need to learn.

That’s why we’re in the Middle East.  We may get more of our oil from Canada, but we get some from OPEC.  More importantly, our trading partners do, too.  If that oil supply to the Western economies gets shut down, we will suffer a recession closer to the Great Depression than the Great Recession.  Oil is important to national security.  Income redistribution isn’t.  Or using the military for humanitarian purposes.  As bad as the suffering was in Darfur, Rwanda, Sri Lanka, etc., we can’t help everyone.  It would stretch our military too thin, cost more than we can afford and risk the lives of those in the military on a mission that doesn’t impact national security.  And all of this would impede the president in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities.  Protecting our national security.

We need Grownups in Charge of our Foreign Policy

Presidents often hailed for their great domestic agendas (FDR and LBJ, for example) have created economic messes that future generations have to clean up.  And because their real interests were in domestic policy, they bungled their foreign policy.  FDR may have rallied the nation to win World War II, but his naïveté gave us the Cold War.  And LBJ’s Whiz Kids mismanaged the Vietnam War so badly that the fallout nearly ignited a civil war in America.  The country changed.  And it’s never been the same since.

Kids don’t like doing their homework.  They’d rather play their games.  In this respect progressives/liberals are very much like children.  They, too, like to play their games.  And don’t like to do their homework.  But the world is a dangerous place.  We need to do our homework.  To learn the lessons of history.  More importantly, we need grownups in charge of our foreign policy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH #34: “Sure, until you win the lotto you’re all for sticking it to the rich.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 5th, 2010

Money Envy

Class warfare is a different kind of warfare.  During the English Civil War, the Protestants and the Catholics were trying to kill each other.  They didn’t want to have anything to do with each other.  Protestants didn’t want to be Catholic.  Catholics didn’t want to be Protestant.  But in class warfare, it’s a little different.  The poor want to be rich.

The poor hate the rich because they have it so much better than the poor.  But they don’t hate the idea of being rich per se.  Just who gets to be rich.  Because, given half the chance, they’d choose to be rich if they could.  Why?  Because the rich typically don’t go wanting for food, shelter or clothes.  They also get to have all the neat toys to play with.  And they wear some nice bling.

So the poor don’t really hate the rich.  It’s just money envy.  After a child grows up he or she may notice that they like money.  They see they have no money of their own.  So they want their mother’s or father’s money.  Because there are limits, and sometimes outright rejection, they seek money elsewhere.  As they grow up, they may get a job.  Sell drugs.  Prostitute themselves to conventioneers.  Marry into it.  Steal it.  Become a ward of the state.  Or play the lotto.

Whose Money is it Anyway?

During this phase in their life, politicians, college professors and the media bombard them with messages of income redistribution.  Fair share sacrifice.  Taxes on the rich.   And all around fairness.  It all sounds good.  And right.  Those damn rich people.  How dare they?  Why them?  Why not me? 

Well, some inherited their money.  Like the Kennedys.  Some married into it.  Like John Kerry.  They live like rich royalty from days of old.  When there was a true aristocratic class that could actually own people.  But they are there, fighting for you.  Liberals.  Taking away other people’s money and giving it to the more deserving.  And the poor are all for that.

A luxury tax?  Yeah, stick it to them.  An inheritance tax?  Sounds good to me.  How about taxing their assets?  Their net wealth?  Because some of those rich bastards don’t even work.  They invest their money.  Sure, they pay a confiscatory capital gains tax on their earnings, but their earnings pale in comparison to their overall wealth.  We need to go after that pile of wealth.  Redistribute it.  Along egalitarian principles.  Level the playing field.  Close the gap between the rich and the poor.  The way the liberals look at it, it’s the government’s money anyway.  So the government can spread it around as they damn well please.

Poor/Rich – It’s All Relative

Most of these rich bastards are not Kennedys or John Kerrys, though.  Most are self-made.  Through hard work.  And personal sacrifice.  Most are small business owners.  They borrowed everything they could.  They mortgaged their homes.  They risked their children’s college funds.  And they made something.  A small business.  Created jobs.  They hired people.  Something the Kennedys and the John Kerrys of the world don’t do.

Most of these small business owners are ‘S’ corporations.  They aren’t big corporations with corporate officers.  No finance or a legal department.  They’re just people who work 80+ hours a week.  They may never see a million in annual revenue.  But they’ll probably make more than $250,000.  And, being an ‘S’ corporation, that makes them rich.  Even if they leave the money in their business to grow it.  But the IRS still taxes them like they’re rich fat cats lighting their cigars with $20 bills. 

Yes, they’re small business owners.  But they’re still pretty much middle class people.  Do the poor hate them, too?  Sort of.  Simply because they have more than they do.  And the politicians, college professors and the media point out how wrong that is.

Congratulations.  And Thank You

And then one day you buy a lotto ticket and, overnight, you become rich.  Congratulations.  It’s nice to have another rich person to tax.

Yes, you won the lotto and now you’re rich.  How does that feel?  Are you looking forward to redistributing your winnings?  For egalitarian principles?  Help close that gap between rich and poor?  Or have you become a greedy rich bastard?  Like all those others you used to hate until you became one of them?

Whether you do or not doesn’t matter.  For the IRS will be coming after you.  With their hand out.  For their share, a sizeable chunk of your winnings.  Your windfall will push you into the highest tax brackets.  And, guess what?  If you don’t pay your ‘fair share of taxes’ willingly, they’ll come after you.  Or seize your wealth.  And as sad as that may be, few will pity you.  Just as you did not pity those before you were rich.

Be Careful What You Vote For

Class warfare is good for politics.  Because there are always more poor people than rich.  And poor people are useful to someone running for public office.

But they don’t like you.  They don’t really care about you.  They care about only one thing.  To keep you poor.  For should you win the lotto, the chances of you voting for high taxes and income redistribution are slim to none.  Your egalitarian principles will fly out the window.  Which won’t help them.  So should you become rich, they will vilify you.  Come after you with a vengeance.  To take your wealth.  And return it to the rightful owners.  Themselves.  The government.  So they can use it as they please.  To buy votes.

And how will you feel then?  You might want to think about this ‘what if’.  Because you could win the lotto one day.  Inherit wealth.  Marry into it.  Or even earn it.  I mean, be careful what you vote for while in college.  One day you might make something of that education.  You may very well become rich one day.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,