However, any political measure that destroys federalism, enhances the taxing and spending powers of Congress, or otherwise goes as far as possible in diluting the Original Constitution yet further is absolutely ok with them.
However, I am loathe to call inequality a problem that requires a government solution. I do not see how it solves the problem to take power away from wealthy people who have a lot of it in order to increase the power of politicians who have far more of it.Liberals love to think how the "rich" or the "greedy," "polluting," "resource-wasting" "capitalists" get it in the neck when some new socialist or statist nostrum slithers into the statute books. Little do they know, remember, contemplate, or care how the income tax when it first appeared was only going to apply to "the rich" and then only to the tune of 4% of their income. (I think I'm close on that figure.) When all was said to revamp and undermine America by 1990, the average American family of four paid 24% of its income in income and employment taxes. In 1948, the same family paid . . . come on, guess now . . . a whopping 2% of its income.
What the American people really should feel awkward and defensive about is the level of inequality and excess of political power.
Somehow, the schemes that liberals devise to stick it to the rich and greedy (liberals are never greedy) end up landing square on the backs of the middle class. On them, too, it turns out. Necessitating new measures to soak the rich.
Such is liberal logic. Beggar thy neighbor, fall at the feet of politicians, love every law (except those that protect national security or the native population), cry about the unfairness of life, and destroy the institutions of liberty.
"Inequality and Excess." By Arnold Kling, TCS Daily, 4/7/08.
2 comments:
Great post, exposing the liberals' mindcramps with your usual flair.
Wondering however, friend, if the fifth word in the fifth paragraph isn't spelled with a 'u'?
Either word works just as well, and always harder than Libtards.
btw, I'm sorry for not coming round more often; that will be changing you'll see.
Thanks. I appreciate the "usual flair" comment, especially.
My spellchecker tells me all systems are go in the post. It could be the logic is the main problem with it. But I appreciate any proofreading, believe me.
:-)
Not to worry about frequency. I only visited you recently after being AWOL for a while. I've been moving some of my junk from point A to point B and that takes it out of me. Also got my first dog bite ever which blossomed into a nice infection. Fortunately, I had a prescription for an antibiotice to use if I need it and boy did I ever. All's well now but I'm not interested in a repeat of that experience.
I know you're enjoying the run up to the election. I cannot imagine three more unworthy, inappropriate, and unqualified people for us to be stuck with. All as voted in by actual voters but, man, this has to be a La Nina side effect or something like that.
I'm going to go lie down with a cold compress now.
Post a Comment