Why property rights are no longer respected
First,
As much as I hate to say it, with the Democrats showing their hand, and making no pretense of "working across the aisle", I feel like as much as I want to not vote Republican, I am in a District where the luxury of voting how I need to, instead of how I want makes that pretty clear. My district, which has been Republican with the exception of the Nancy Boyda years is a toss up. No labels Lynn Jenkins is retiring, and the Republican has been a no-show for most of the campaign season. We saw in the Kavanaugh rape that the Democrats see their work being flushed down the toilet, as it was not built on statute. (Notable exception is the Affordable Care Act, which is still around, though it is the walking dead without the individual mandate.)
Speaking of the ACA, as it does impact the Missouri Senate race.
When I did my paper on health care policy, I pointed out the difference for average people between having insurance and access to care. I did the whole ACA thing, entered my income, and for a Bronze plan, it would cost me $1,000 a month in premiums. So what did I get for that grand? Well, other than preventive care, any time I needed a doctor, it came out of my pocket, until I hit my deductible. Any thought what that deductible was? $13,000. That's right. No hospital coverage, no doctor, no prescription paid by that insurance (at $1,000 a month) until I used that deductible. Did I have insurance in the hypothetical? Yes, did I have healthcare access? Sure. Did I have health care? Not really. Anyway, I digress.
Property was mentioned in the Declaration, though it was referred to as "Pursuit of Happiness". Without being secure in property, there is nothing to look forward to except subsistence. The Pilgrims proved that, by having nearly half of them dying in the first year of their communal experiment. Like the 20th Century Motor Company of Atlas Shrugged, people tend to work down to the ability of those similarly paid. Rarely do they work above it. Without property rights, there is no incentive to try to get ahead, if it is going to be taken from you. The needy get needier, and those with great ability and an ethic to work are worked harder, ultimately by a metaphorical lash, until they decide they will just be needy too. This is the secret of the unleashing the Kraken that Trump and the GOP did with their Jobs Act last year. It encouraged businesses to get their money out of hiding and invest. It allowed for a real discussion about whether or not manufacturing is feasible in the US. After all, that loop hole that we always heard President Obama and other Democrats mention that made businesses relocate overseas? That loophole was the lower tax rates. Yes, labor was part, but not as big of a player as everyone thinks.
So where are people not secure in their property? Well, other than asset seizures by the government, which is just done at gunpoint what the government does by statute otherwise.
It all began in 1913. The income tax was made constitutional by the 16th Amendment. Of course, as all taxes it was sold as "it will only be a small fraction of people paying it, and it won't be that much" And they were right. It was a 7% tax on earners making more that $500,000 a year, which in today's dollars would be $11 million. Seven percent. On people making tens of millions a year. This was when property confiscation by the federal government began. As bad as that was, by 1918, the top earners were paying 77%. For some reason, people didn't seem to be in the mood to make as much money by then, and the economy went south. "But that was before the roaring 20s, That doesn't sound like a bad economy" Yes you are correct. But Harding was elected, and they cut the tax rate to 25% and cut government spending as well. (that is what the current GOP forgot to do)
But everyone pays taxes, you might say. And you are right. And while I philosophically feel that every one should pay the same DOLLAR amount, I can accept a flat tax percentage as "fair". For taxes to be equitable, all need to be taxed, percentage wise, at least, the same. If some are taxed higher than others, that is government taking from one and giving to another. If I decided to do that to my neighbor, that would be theft.
There have been so many attempts to redistribute wealth in this country, and each time it gets a little easier. We have corporations saying thank you for reducing their tax to 20 or 21, or whatever percentage it is. Why did we screw those small businesses that file on their personal forms? Why are we screwing the rich by a 39% tax rate? A rate, by the way, that starts far lower than the $11 million or even the actual $500 thousand in 1913 dollars.
That doesn't even mention the asset forfeiture laws. or the Imminent Domain usage that has gone far beyond its intent. We have drifted so far from the Constitution, and then we say: "the Constitution doesn't work anymore". what we need is a return to it. A return to accountability. Where we aren't letting businesses take huge risks for potential huge profits, and then when everything comes crashing down, swoop in and pick up the pieces for them. Though, for the record, TARP was paid off by the banks, except Fannie, Freddie, and GM and Chrysler. And maybe they were too. Shouldn't have happened. We bail them out, and give the keys back to the person that drove them over the cliff.
Taking property from one, whether it is Imminent Domain, or "Progressive" Tax rates, and giving it to another, is nothing but legalized theft.
As much as I hate to say it, with the Democrats showing their hand, and making no pretense of "working across the aisle", I feel like as much as I want to not vote Republican, I am in a District where the luxury of voting how I need to, instead of how I want makes that pretty clear. My district, which has been Republican with the exception of the Nancy Boyda years is a toss up. No labels Lynn Jenkins is retiring, and the Republican has been a no-show for most of the campaign season. We saw in the Kavanaugh rape that the Democrats see their work being flushed down the toilet, as it was not built on statute. (Notable exception is the Affordable Care Act, which is still around, though it is the walking dead without the individual mandate.)
Speaking of the ACA, as it does impact the Missouri Senate race.
When I did my paper on health care policy, I pointed out the difference for average people between having insurance and access to care. I did the whole ACA thing, entered my income, and for a Bronze plan, it would cost me $1,000 a month in premiums. So what did I get for that grand? Well, other than preventive care, any time I needed a doctor, it came out of my pocket, until I hit my deductible. Any thought what that deductible was? $13,000. That's right. No hospital coverage, no doctor, no prescription paid by that insurance (at $1,000 a month) until I used that deductible. Did I have insurance in the hypothetical? Yes, did I have healthcare access? Sure. Did I have health care? Not really. Anyway, I digress.
Property was mentioned in the Declaration, though it was referred to as "Pursuit of Happiness". Without being secure in property, there is nothing to look forward to except subsistence. The Pilgrims proved that, by having nearly half of them dying in the first year of their communal experiment. Like the 20th Century Motor Company of Atlas Shrugged, people tend to work down to the ability of those similarly paid. Rarely do they work above it. Without property rights, there is no incentive to try to get ahead, if it is going to be taken from you. The needy get needier, and those with great ability and an ethic to work are worked harder, ultimately by a metaphorical lash, until they decide they will just be needy too. This is the secret of the unleashing the Kraken that Trump and the GOP did with their Jobs Act last year. It encouraged businesses to get their money out of hiding and invest. It allowed for a real discussion about whether or not manufacturing is feasible in the US. After all, that loop hole that we always heard President Obama and other Democrats mention that made businesses relocate overseas? That loophole was the lower tax rates. Yes, labor was part, but not as big of a player as everyone thinks.
So where are people not secure in their property? Well, other than asset seizures by the government, which is just done at gunpoint what the government does by statute otherwise.
It all began in 1913. The income tax was made constitutional by the 16th Amendment. Of course, as all taxes it was sold as "it will only be a small fraction of people paying it, and it won't be that much" And they were right. It was a 7% tax on earners making more that $500,000 a year, which in today's dollars would be $11 million. Seven percent. On people making tens of millions a year. This was when property confiscation by the federal government began. As bad as that was, by 1918, the top earners were paying 77%. For some reason, people didn't seem to be in the mood to make as much money by then, and the economy went south. "But that was before the roaring 20s, That doesn't sound like a bad economy" Yes you are correct. But Harding was elected, and they cut the tax rate to 25% and cut government spending as well. (that is what the current GOP forgot to do)
But everyone pays taxes, you might say. And you are right. And while I philosophically feel that every one should pay the same DOLLAR amount, I can accept a flat tax percentage as "fair". For taxes to be equitable, all need to be taxed, percentage wise, at least, the same. If some are taxed higher than others, that is government taking from one and giving to another. If I decided to do that to my neighbor, that would be theft.
There have been so many attempts to redistribute wealth in this country, and each time it gets a little easier. We have corporations saying thank you for reducing their tax to 20 or 21, or whatever percentage it is. Why did we screw those small businesses that file on their personal forms? Why are we screwing the rich by a 39% tax rate? A rate, by the way, that starts far lower than the $11 million or even the actual $500 thousand in 1913 dollars.
That doesn't even mention the asset forfeiture laws. or the Imminent Domain usage that has gone far beyond its intent. We have drifted so far from the Constitution, and then we say: "the Constitution doesn't work anymore". what we need is a return to it. A return to accountability. Where we aren't letting businesses take huge risks for potential huge profits, and then when everything comes crashing down, swoop in and pick up the pieces for them. Though, for the record, TARP was paid off by the banks, except Fannie, Freddie, and GM and Chrysler. And maybe they were too. Shouldn't have happened. We bail them out, and give the keys back to the person that drove them over the cliff.
Taking property from one, whether it is Imminent Domain, or "Progressive" Tax rates, and giving it to another, is nothing but legalized theft.
Comments
Post a Comment