The jabber about how poor people are actually paying for the successful
is beyond belief. All sorts of arguments are being made about how poor
people somehow pay for the infrastructure the wealthy exploit.
And the chestnut about how tax breaks aid the wealth disproportionately
is once again brought out.
(Yeah, if Alice was paying $50K in taxes and the taxes are cut to $40K
she "benefits more" than Bob the Wino who got no tax benefits because
he paid no taxes. Which misses the point about Alice's high taxes in
the first place.)
This is why the "Tax Freedom Day" approach is more useful. Tax freedom
day is of course the day when the average American or Brit or whatever
has stopped working for the government and has the rest of his income
for himself. For most years, this is estimated to around May-June. That
is, for almost half of a year a typical taxpayer is working for the
government.
Not a perfect measure, as it averages together folks of various tax
brackets, including the many in America who pay nothing (but it doesn't
assign a negative number to those who receive "net net" money from the
government). And it fails to take into account the double taxation
which a business owner faces: roughly a 50% tax on his profits, then
when the profits are disbursed to the owners of the corporation,
another 35-45% tax bite. For a business owner, he is effectively
working for the government for the first 70% of every year. Which means
only October-December is he working for his own interests.
Jabber about how poor people are actually receiving fewer tax benefits
than rich people misses the point of who's working for whom.
Alice, an engineer or pharmacist or perhaps a small business owner,
works between 40% and 70% of her time to pay money into government.
Bob, a crack addict collecting "disability" or welfare or other
government freebies, works 0% of his time for the government/society.
("Dat not true. I gots to stands in line to get my check increased!")
Alice is a source, Bob is a sink. Talk about how Alice gets benefits
ignores the fact that she's working for the government for a big chunk
of her life. Bob is not. Alice is a slave for the government, and
"society," so that Bob can lounge in his mobile home watching ESPN and
collecting a monthly check.
(I'd like to know why all of the folks here in California who are
getting "benefits" and "services" are not at my door on Saturday
morning to help me with my yard work. I'd like to know why finding
reliable yard workers has become nearly impossible in the past couple
of decades. "Will work for food" signs are a fucking joke...try hiring
one of those layabouts to actually do some work for food and watch the
sneers, or watch them threatening to fake a work injury if a shakedown
fee is not given to them. These people should be put in lime pits.)
When you hear John Young and Tyler Durden nattering about the "persons
of privilege" are reaping the rewards of a benificent government, think
about Alice and Bob and ask yourself who'se doing the real work. Ask
who're the sources and who're the sinks.
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his
need...and I've got a game to watch on satellite...and where's my
check?"
--Tim May
"The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any
member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm
to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient
warrant." --John Stuart Mill
- Re: Sources and Sinks Tim May
- Re: Sources and Sinks Justin
- Re: Sources and Sinks Tim May
- Re: Sources and Sinks Justin
- Re: Sources and Sinks bgt
- So many statists Tim May
- Re: So many statists John Young
- Re: Sources and Sinks James A. Donald
- Re: Sources and Sinks Steve Schear
- Re: Sources and Sinks ken
- Re: Sources and Sinks Nostradumbass