Published: Monday, Oct. 1 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
Keith and supporters claim government doesn't create wealth. If they are
right, then neither do business owners, their managerial staff and service
contractors. Only their laborers do.
Another shallow, simplistic conservative argument for a fantasy world that would
be an absolute hell to live in."It would give hope and re-enable
a path to the American dream."Many people, including this letter
writer, worship the holy America Dream without understanding what it even is.
Guess what? It is not a mansion, a million dollars, and 10 milligrams of Ambien
before bedtime. Here's the dictionary definition: "An American social
ideal that stresses egalitarianism and esp. material prosperity." Yes,
equality. When we can figure out a way to correct our corporation-dominated
system so that it produces both equality and prosperity, then we may have a
chance at achieving the American Dream.Making the tired old claim
that government is the problem is both false and duplicitous.
Our government's constitutional responsibility is to "...promote the
general welfare...." not assure. Finding the correct role for government is
determined by political philosophy. The socialists/communists (do everything)
and libertarians/anarchists (do nothing) are at the extremes and seem to have
captured the two major parties. Neither presidential candidate reassures me.
As history recalls -- Adolph Hitler ran his rise to power based on
the cries of inefficient Government and the evil liberal Weimar Republic.He promised to make every facet of German society ultra-efficient, lean,
running like clock work. He eliminated waste in Government and Society. You either produced to Society, or you were eliminated from Society -- Nobody
got a Free lunch.Auschwitz was an example of even turning mass human
genocide and extermination as efficient as modern factory.Remember
the old adage: Hey, at least he made the trains run on time.
Where are the jobs? We've seen lower taxes for almost 12 years.
So where are the jobs?
When 1% owns 80% of everything, they should pay 80% of the taxes.When a rich man builds his roads,builds his own infra-structure [water,
sewr, power],has his own police force,has his own Fire &
Ambulance,educates his own workforce,finds his own medical cures,and builds and maintains his own standing army,THEN and only then can
cry about how unfair the redistibution of wealth is. But the
taxpayers including the 1% are the ones who paid to build all the
infra-structure and pay for all the services that non tax payers get to enjoy
and use. What a class warfare statement to say the non tax payers paid for all
this.The CBO reported the top 1 percent earns 13.4 percent of all
pre-tax income, but paid 22.3 percent of taxes in 2009. But because they have
accumulated wealth you demand they pay more tax. In other words if I put money
in a savings account you expect me to pay more taxes. You want to rob me of my
savings. At what level of savings will you leave my savings alone.
Re: "Tax rates are at an all time low"Ha!Taxes
have never been higher -- but they're headed there.Before 1913,
there were no federal direct taxes. That is not to say no taxes, but they were
hidden away in the cost of goods and services. Back then, taxation for most
Americans is estimated to have averaged 3-6%.Then
"progressives" took power, and taxes exploded.Today, about
50% of middle class American incomes are filched in taxes.Visible
taxes include -- state/federal/local income and social program taxes, real and
personal property taxes, sales and use taxes [including gas and other
transportation taxes and fees], and several excise taxes. Many are compound --
taxing previously taxed income.But, in addition to those, there are
hundreds more. Most are hidden and compounding in the cost of goods and
services. These include import duties, "corporate" income and
transaction taxes [a misnomer; corporations don't pay taxes, consumers do],
debt service/interest, and most insidious of all -- the Fed's inflationary
thievery.Talk about grievous to be borne!
No As history recalls -- Adolph Hitler ran on the promise of equality for
all.Points from the "Program of the National Socialist German
Workers' Party""We demand that the State shall above all
undertake to ensure that every citizen shall have the possibility of living
decently and earning a livelihood. All citizens must possess equal rights
and duties.That all unearned income, and all income that does not arise
from work, be abolished.We demand the creation and maintenance of a sound
middle-class, The enactment of a law to expropriate the owners without
compensation of any land needed for the common purpose. The abolition of ground
rents, and the prohibition of all speculation in land.The State has the
duty to help raise the standard of national health by …increasing physical
fitness through the introduction of compulsory games and gymnastics, and by the
greatest possible encouragement of associations concerned with the physical
education of the young.COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD."
Re: "Remember the old adage: Hey, at least he made the trains run on
time."Uh, that was Mussolini.But, set that aside for
a minute -- I'm not following the argument. Why castigate a fellow
socialist for the same principles liberals currently advocate? The "no free
lunch" argument is the one the regime used to promote Obamacare's
mandatory lock step. And its historically improbable government efficiencies
were supposed to offset the thievery of Medicare funds.But, to an
even more basic issue -- are liberals now insisting government SHOULD be
inefficient? Or, that if Obama could ever get trains to run on-time, everything
else he's done to destroy America must be forgiven?Hmmmmm.
To "The Real Maverick" if you want to look at the recent history of jobs
in the US, prior to your Democrats taking control we had around 5% unemployment.
Since then it has crept up to over 8%, or higher if you look at the number of
people who simply gave up. The jobs dried up during the Democrats watch, so why
should we keep them around since they killed the employment rates?To
"LDS Liberal" history also recalls that Hitler used extensive social
welfare programs, such as old age pensions, they promised free education, free
healthcare, mandated profit sharing in business, all was to be carried out
through the central government. They had an extensive welfare system that was
used in propaganda by Hitler.
Banks, Wall Street and big business are even more inefficient than government.
They are fueled by greed. Government didn't cause the financial collapse.
So how do you organize a community without government? If you get two people
together and develop some type of cooperative arrangement, don't you have a
"government" with a governing set of rules?Anarchy
isn't a viable option. The Old West see any civilizing force until
"law and order" came to town and government was established to serve the
interests of the community. However, to say that "government is
inefficient" is an oxymoron. Any system has its inefficiencies just like
any machine has its inefficiencies. Matter is neither created nor destroyed.
It is only transformed.Usually it is not "government" that
is inefficient; it is the people who make up "government" who are
inefficient. Politicians learn how to take advantage of the inefficiencies for
their personal benefit. Why else do they become politicians? The revolving
door between higher office and lucrative private-sector jobs is revealing.Change within government is affected by inertia and the self-interest of
those who serve and those who they depend upon for their election. Call it
"inefficient" but recognize it for what it is.
Mountanman Hayden, ID"Obama is responsible for everything bad
in the world!"Is this a correct summary of your views?
@ Ali'ikai 'A'amakualenalena"Obama is responsible
for everything bad in the world!"Is this a correct summary of your
views?I would put it this way--there is "more truth than
poetry" in that statement. There certainly no question but that Mr. Obama
is EXTREMELY liberal. I have asked this question of you liberals a number
of times and have never gotten an answer:If conservatives are the
"dunderheads" you claim, why does Utah, which is governed mostly by
conservatives year after year, consistently have a very healthy economy and low
unemployment? As they say, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".
For the nation as a whole, we have conservatives in power, then liberals, then
an even mix, etc., so it is hard to tell which does what and who is really doing
a good job. However, when a state consistently has one or the other, such as
Utah, you can get a much better indication of who is responsible for success or
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments