Charter Member of the Sub-Media

June 16, 2004

A Modest Proposal* « Politics As Usual »

One of the essential hypocrisies of Liberals/Democrats is that they claim to be more compassionate, said compassion being exercised by voting for politicians who raise taxes to solve all the social ills.
Conservatives/Republicans don't deny that there are social ills, they (we) just believe that raising taxes and increasing government spending/programs is wasteful at best, and in actuality end up harming the relatively poor even worse through inflation and depressed economies.
And the worst of it is that the Liberals/Democrats who believe so much in helping their fellow man don't want to make the giving voluntary; in fact, they aren't satisfied unless everyone pays more. It seems like a personal conviction should really be personal, and not forced onto everyone. The number of rich liberals like John Kerry, Al Gore, George Soros, and the Hollywood elite, et al, who decry the disparity between rich and poor while raking in cash hand over fist is disgusting.
As above, so below, as it is truly ironic to hear Democrats so upset over state funding problems over lattes. If you have the extra money to buy yourself comfort, you have no business advocating forcible redistribution economies.

So how 'bout it? Care to put your money where your mouth is?

Technology has progressed to the point where it would be simplicity itself to cross reference voting records with tax records. What if, from now on, those who vote Democrat double their tax rate, those who vote Republican have their tax rate halved, and those who don't vote see no change. Further, Democrat-vote taxes can go to welfare, education, government-funded health care, etc, whereas Republican-vote taxes can go for college scholarships and defense spending. That way, if you have enough money in your account from your own ideological supporters, you can do what you want without interference from the opposite party.
Oh, yeah: common-use funding like infrastructure and most Department funding would come from both parties off the top.

The details can be hammered out. The generalities are the point:
Democrats pay for Democrat programs with higher taxes, Republicans pay for Republican programs with lower taxes. If we ever enacted this, I'll bet you a dime to a dollar within 4 years the Republican budget dwarfs the Democrat.

*in the same snarky manner as Swift, if you must know.

Posted by Nathan at 02:59 AM | Comments (2)
Comments

Perhaps we should use a weighted voting system when it comes to appropriations. Take your gross tax value as the weight. If you pay a lot, your vote counts more.
The current tax system with it's hyper progressivity makes the governments best mechanism for generating more revenue the process of making the rich richer, since more of the rich's income is taxable. The poor don't pay, so making them richer produces little to no tax revenue.
What a country.

Posted by: J_Crater at June 16, 2004 07:41 PM

Ooh! Nice. I never really considered that aspect, but I like it!
Sort of. I don't like the idea of George Soros and Ted Turner's votes counting more than mine...

Posted by: Nathan at June 16, 2004 10:27 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?