Disparity

Definition reminder, Socialism: "Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy."

--------------------------------

"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." -Margaret Thatcher.

My cousin [once removed, I believe] forwarded me the Margaret Thatcher quote above. I thought everyone should see it. If you have read any of my previous posts, we may have clarified where we agree or disagree.
You probably...
....see socialism on the horizon and agree that we must take action to get away from it.
....see that some people talk about socialism, but don't really think we are headed that way, and think it is overly pessimistic to think we are.
....see socialism as a good thing.

Part of the trouble with seeing a policital and economic shift to socialism is that we live in America. The word socialism has negative conotations, so we naturally assume that since we live in America, and America stands for goodness and freedom, surely we would never accept socialism. However, if you remind yourself of the definition, you may see differently. Social programs have been growing and growing, in the name of humanity. People see the benefit, but fail to recognize what is required to make these social services available, we fail to see the cost, which is much more than just monetary.

I have become more aware of some extreme disparity within this country, all in the name of helping people, in the name of goodness and fairness. The message is good and pleasant, but the results are the opposite of what was intended for this country for our forefathers.

"No taxation without representation"

This was the slogan of the revolutionaries. The British government taxed the people of the American Colonies, and the colonists felt that they were not being represented in the government. I feel this way right now.

Take for instance the Earned Income Tax Credit. This law returns taxes to people of low income, in some cases it credits the people with additional funds beyond that of any taxes they paid. This means that if you don't make any money, you may be eligible to receive money "from the government" because you are poor. Do you agree with this policy?
http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96406,00.html

What does this have to do with socialism and taxation without representation?

Our government collects taxes, I know that I pay them. If you don't make very much money, then that government gives you more than you paid to help you out, to "encourage" you to work. Huh? Our government takes money from me, and gives it to someone who is poor, they deserve it right?

Now my ears start to spout steam when I realize that all these people who are having money redistributed to them are also voters. A bunch of poor voters get together and elect someone who will give them something for nothing in return (except votes...power) and they then take from me, what they cannot or will not earn themselves. 40% of the country does not pay income tax.

Am I being represented? Is this something other than distribution of goods?

I doubt these questions will ever be answered by anyone of consequence, but they need to be asked. I keep going back to Article 1, Section 8 of our wonderful and forgotten constitution..."but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." Is this a uniform system? In the name of selflessness and humanitarianism, we will lose all rights, all liberty and all freedoms. Can this lead anywhere else?

"An equal application of law to every condition of man is fundamental." --Thomas Jefferson to George Hay, 1807.