Dem Congresswoman: “You Don’t Deserve To Keep All” Of Your Money
15th September 2011
Read it. And watch the video. A Pepto-Bismol moment.
“I’ll put it this way, you don’t deserve to keep all of it. It’s not a question of deserving, because what government is, is those things that we decide to do together,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) told the Don Wade & Roma show on WLS-AM.
“I think you need to pay your fair share for things we’ve decided are our national priorities,” Schakowsky added.
Don’t really need to say anything, do I?
September 15th, 2011 at 08:01
It is from this attitude that I am a refugee. To my former Illinois friends, there’s plenty more room in Texas!
September 15th, 2011 at 09:41
Makes it easy to see why they consider a tax cut a subsidy or government expenditure. In their mind they own it all. A dangerous attitude for liberty.
September 15th, 2011 at 19:25
“For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.” Luke 12:48 (King James Version)
Those who make the most money have benefited most from our capitalist society, however flawed you may find it to be. It is only fitting and just, therefore, that they should be taxed more; it is the vehicle by which they give back to the society which allowed them to prosper.
Even Jesus said so. So there.
September 16th, 2011 at 11:53
“For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.” Luke 12:48 (King James Version)
You make an interesting application of this verse Dennis which illustrates THE major mindset of liberals and progressives for the last century. (Which is a dangerous one.) The presumption that the government is God or that the government should play god to its citizens. The passage you are using applies to God holding people to account for what He has blessed them with (in the form of a parable.)
The government is not the dispenser of living standards (for lack of a better term) and when it does take that role, the criteria it uses to bestow a living standard on someone are unjust by default for the following reasons:
1. The government must take from someone who has made good decisions and worked hard thus separating him/her from their just reward and give it to another person who knows nothing of the sacrifice, discipline, risk and hard work of the first man/woman.
2. In granting a higher living standard to someone who has made bad choices, never acquired a useful skill and doesn’t care to work for themselves, the government separates that person from the reproofs of life that would teach him/her to do otherwise. (Luk 12:47-48 And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes…)
I appreciate you Biblical references but the context is key. God never intended man to be more obligated or beholden to government(s) than to Himself. The passage you quoted is an ominous challenge.
It is unfortunate that many Americans have adopted the same wrong thinking, that the government is god, and become dependent on a government that shields them from the consequences of the Natural Law while sending the “bill” to those who do their best to live responsibly.
September 16th, 2011 at 12:19
“Those who make the most money have benefited most from our capitalist society, however flawed you may find it to be. It is only fitting and just, therefore, that they should be taxed more; it is the vehicle by which they give back to the society which allowed them to prosper.”
1. If the tax rate for everyone was say 20%, the rich would be “taxed more.” Taxing at a higher RATE than any others is not fair, it’s punishment. See above… “sending the ‘bill’ to those who would do their best to live responsibly”. Again, the government is playing god.
2. The vehicle by which they GIVE back? Giving back is a voluntary choice. The tax code, despite rumors to the contrary, is not voluntary.
3. “the society which allowed them to prosper” free societies by definition provide OPPORTUNITY to all. It is not a matter of having been “ALLOWED” to prosper. Only centrally planned economies grant permission or “allow”, some to prosper. Those same centrally planned economies “allow you” to “give” back on dictated terms that are not “fair”. Once again, a government that plays god.
Freedom is frighteningly absent from your presumptions here.
There is a proper role for government and taxation is a necessary function of it but social engineering is not part of it.