Attitude – Its Mine, Not Yours

We have come a long way since the early days of our founding and the formation of our Constitution. Two aspects that reflect this position are taxes and the size of our government. Our leaders over the centuries have moved us further away from the original intent of the Founders. Part of the explanation for higher taxes can be attributed to the growth of government. The disturbing aspect of this change is that the government now feels that the fruits of the individual’s labor are really the property of the government. This ideology is expressed in many ways by our representatives, with an end result that is always the same; a centralized government that evolves into a dictatorship.

One needs to pay close attention to the rhetoric used by our representatives; they suggest they are working for the common man, but their actions belie their stated positions. Frequently legislation is passed that exempts our representatives and segments of the population that tend to support the government’s seizure for power. The paradigm that has evolved as a result of our government’s actions over the centuries is reducing the ability of individuals to control their destiny, while increasing the influence of the centralized government.

There is only one way to stimulate constructive growth of a nation, and that is through the efforts of the individual. If the government is continually depleting a person’s earnings, then the individual will be less inclined to accumulate capital that can be applied to our economic system in some constructive manner in the future. The fruits of one’s labor need not be spent as soon as it is earned, but it would seem this is the position our government is suggesting. Government is responsible for getting us into the current recession; had it not given into the special interest groups associated with the housing industry we may not be in this position today.

The current healthcare system is another case that suggests the government does not know what it is doing, assuming our representatives want to stabilize our economy. It has now been shown that the estimated cost of this program will fall short of the actual cost of this legislation. Many representatives are suggesting that the program only needs a few modifications to make it workable, but they fail to look at the growth of the agencies that will be required to make this current system work. This program is designed to grow government and ingratiate segments of the population for voting purposes; in reality it was designed to enhance the power of government without any regard to its impact on our fiscal stability.

Who pays the taxes that support our system? It is interesting to see who is paying for the government and all its programs. The top 1% of the taxes payers paid about 38% of the Federal Income tax. The top 5% paid about 59% of the Federal Income tax, and the top 10% paid about 70% of the Federal Income tax. The top 50% paid 97% of the Federal tax. That leaves the bottom 50% paying 3% of the Federal tax. What we have is 50% of the population paying for the operation of the government and 47% having no obligation, and yet some of our political leaders are calling for the highest payers to pay more. It would appear that the government will not be satisfied until all those in the private sector are on welfare; note that this statement did not include those in the public sector, but who is going to pay for the public sector when they have drained the private sector dry?  We need to get back to a rational system that is self-sustaining and fiscally responsible. The statement that we will always have the poor among us is true, but among them there are those that are there out of choice, and there are others that are incapable of supporting themselves. Most citizens are not opposed to helping out the latter group, but they resent aiding those that are unwilling to work when there are no real limiting factors.

Charlie Allo