Jeff Neal for C.U.R.E. - Certain Unalienable Rights Endowment

Want to help the poor? Want to tax the rich? Will you chose a side in The Civil War II.

In Opinion on April 14, 2012 at 5:31 pm

President’s Weekend Address of April 14

Our president took 4 minutes and 15 seconds in his weekly address to tell us that the economic future of our country hinges on whether or not he can convince enough members of Congress to vote for the Buffett Rule.  We’re told that we need everyone “to play by the same rules” because we have “deficits to close” and we can’t “continue to spend more than we take in” while millionaires and billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretary.  It’s “simple – if you make more than a million dollars, you should not pay the same tax rate as a middle class family.”  That’s “all there is too it.”  We need to “invest in education, research and new sources of energy.”


The Buffett Rule would purportedly collect $47.5 billion over ten years – the government will spend approximately 100 times that over the same period.  So, clearly this isn’t about the spending or budgetary priorities.

OH, and there’s this.  How is it ‘fair’ that after a person has made more than $X, the rules should change.  Is his next hour of earnings worth less money?  If I’m digging a ditch next to, say, a black man, maybe Michael Jordan’s son, and he has a trust fund that pays him $1,000,000 per year, is an hour of my ditch digging worth more than his?  If not, why should he put less in his pocket for the same amount of labor?  How is that moral?

Our progressive tax code is immoral.  Why should 90% of the country have the power to tell 10% of the country that they have to live by a different set of rules?  How is that just?  What if all the right-handed people (a majority) voted to make lefties pay a tax premium = to 10% of their income?  Would that be moral?  How does making more money make a man less entitled to keep the same proportion of his next dollar of income as his neighbor who makes less money?  “He doesn’t really need it” is not a moral defense, it’s a judgment and a rationalization.  It is an offense to the principle of fairness – fairness absent the skewing effect of envy, that is.

More importantly, what the government does with $3.7 trillion per year is more disturbing as a moral matter than the confiscation of that money from the ‘rich.’  The government is enslaving millions and millions of our fellow citizens by making them dependent on their next government check.  They are locked into a state of mind that stifles their very humanity, their will to produce for themselves, their right to be self reliant, deprived of, dare I say it, their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  That the government does this in the name of fairness, hiding their sin of buying other men’s lives under the cover of charity and benevolence is clever and grotesque.

America, it’s time to stand up for the poor.  It’s time to stop taxing the rich so that politicians can buy and sell the lives of their entitled classes.  If we don’t stop that crime against humanity, we are not worthy of the legacy our founders offered us, and it’s time to let the collapse occur so free men can start anew and refound a nation that protects the rights our Creator bestows upon every man.

Our first Civil War was over, among other secondary issues, slavery.  So is the one we’re headed for today.  Which side are you on – the slaves or the master?  Are you for freeing the slaves [again] or are you cheering for a benevolent government?  Are you cheering for taxing the rich and empowering the government to enslave more and more of your neighbors?

Choose.  Soon.

To abstain is to enslave yourself; the government will own you whether you’re rich or poor.

  1. While I agree with absolutely everything you posit here, you have left out the most important point: in this free nation, anyone who wants to (or believes they should be compelled to) pay more tax is free to do so already. There is no need for a law or “rule”. If Warren Buffett is truly concerned that he is not paying enough tax then he is free to pay as much more as he believes is fair for him to pay.

    • Yes, Kurt. Instead, Mr Buffett has spent millions of dollars to tax accountants and lawyers to make sure that none of his vast wealth is taken by the US Treasury upon his death, because he has decided that The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will dispose of that wealth better than Harry Reid and Barack Obama would? I don’t begrudge him that option, but I do cringe when I hear people invoke his name in the support of a bigger government that he wants to be paid for by you and me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: