Time out, Patrick… Family meeting. So, conservative brotha to conservative brother, let’s talk. I want to respond to your last post, “Taxes are NOT Evil” because you paint with such a wide brush that is hard to really hear your true concern of fiscal reponsibility. Although some would question if you are really a liberal pretending to conservative, I give you the benefit of the doubt that you are conservative at heart, but a little muddled in the head due to the intentional ploys of the left to deceive. Trust me, I know all about that as a black conservative. And the only reason I do this with a public post is because I think the public dialogue will do many others some good too in that regard.
Most rational minded folks, conservative and liberal, understand the need for taxes in society. They just want responsible stewards using them in ways that actually benefit society by taking only the necessary amount of taxes need to do so. When that’s not the case, you’re damn right that I don’t want to waste another dime of my money on that system. However, that system has the power to take it anyway and jail you for not letting them, thus, there is the justified indignation to the point of contentious irreverence towards the government and taxes because of feeling robbed by something evil. You have to understand why its so emotionally charging.
Like you, I actually disagree with Jindal’s decision; not because I want more taxes, or even that its a small tax less than a nickel because it still adds up over time. I just think a renewal cannot be viewed the same as a tax increase, per se. However, to not renew is effectively the same as a tax cut; and your point is valid that there has to be some revenue to get us out of the hole that years of irresponsible spending has put us in. So if the cut in revenue is not matched with a balanced and necessary cut in spending, that can do more harm in the long run.
Now, I want to address a few points you make that I believe may add to your perspective. First, government spending, especially entitlement spending, CANNOT generate revenue. Only government investment into creating jobs can increase revenue. Furthermore, if that “investment” is also taxing less to leave companies and individuals with more to spend and hire, that increases both sales tax and income tax revenue overall.
Second, capitalism is an economic philosophy or structure, not a form of government. Our representative democracy form of of government can choose the type of economic structure for us, from capitalism to socialism. If we have a totalitarian form of government like a dictatorship or monarchy, the executive ruler would decide what economic structure we have. It is the economic philosophy that determines how much the government should control in order to ensure the welfare of citizens. In either case of government, taxes can be managed irresponsibly. So socialist economics, which takes more from private citizens who have the God-given right and ability to provide for their own welfare to give to other citizens with the same God-given right and ability, just assures the government will have more tax money to control. Even worse, that money doesn’t always find its way through the bureaucracy back to citizens for whose welfare its supposed to provide. So in a capitalistic structure decided by the people of a representative democracy, we need to ensure government operates according to the will of the majority and not a few socialist who think they know better than the majority of people.
Thus, here lies my true concern for addressing you publicly as I believe those few socialists want to confuse the minds of enough people to steer this representative democracy away from its economic principles that created this great nation in the first place. I applaud your passion and concern for government as a young conservative, but just be careful to not solidify your views against apparently radical views by taking a radical and overgeneralizing view yourself.
And that goes out to us all, not just my boy, Patrick.