... The Tax-Man Cometh.
(which is a great blog-post title in its own right, but I digress...)
The Left (use your own definition, it'll get you close) seems inordinately interested (not to say nosey) about the average Joe's money, and how he spends it. It seems the Federal Government (especially under Democrat leadership, but not exclusively so) agrees. To wit, the previous Administration arranged to expand the workforce of the IRS by a number uncomfortably larger than eighty thousand (80,000) bodies. Feel free to search for the references, they're there.
Thankfully, that idea was quashed, along with mandatory reporting of any expenditure to a particular recipient larger than $600 in a year's time (that amount tracks your UTILITY payments, folks). The IRS already requires tracking of amounts larger than ten thousand dollars. It (the government, et. al.) has done this in the past under the idea that We The People have been underreporting income, and what we did with it, in order to make sure we give the Government its fair share.
Fair Share.
What is our 'Fair Share'?
Before I continue, it is important to note that we did not always pay an income tax. It wasn't until the ratification of the 16th Amendment that we did so. And the common person was not in its sights; the amendment was passed under the slogan, "Soak the Rich" The One Percent, of the day, if you will. And, envy, in the hands of a democratic (a.k.a. "mob rule") vote, the 99% envious majority voted predictably and Income Tax became the law of the land.
But did it stay just the 1%?
I'm afraid not.
It has crept down the brackets to the average Joe, and even the below average Joe. We each must put in our 'withholding' amounts every paycheck, and hope to get a fraction back at tax time. We call it a 'refund'. Technically, that's what it is. But it is good to remember that this 'refund' is in actuality our own money that we overpaid.
It wouldn't bother me so much if the Government would stick to its original mandate, and paid attention to the needs of the country as a whole, defending the nation, mediating interstate commerce, and other such things. But it got into the generosity business. And, with the common sense of a prodigal child, it has spent this country's income prodigiously.
But has it come to it's senses? If it weren't so painful it would be laughable. Thus we come to Randy Cassingham's nugget below.
The nugget comes from Randy Cassingham's web-paper, This Is True (tm), from his archive section (click here to see the original).
Stanley S. Newberg fled persecution as a Jew and came to America. He did well, and when he died, his estate was valued at $8.4 million.
He was also grateful to the country that took him in: his will left $5.6 million in cash to the U.S. Government.
Based on 1994 spending rates, the money will last just under two minutes.
Randy adds the tag line of, "And we thank you for the six wrenches and four vinyl binders from the bottom of our hearts," (because we all know how well the government spends other people's money).
(From Randy's letter code on the original posting, the article came from Associated Press, and he, himself, wrote the nugget. This, and the links already included above, should cover any 'fair use' requirements.)
Back to the diatribe. Many of you readers (heh, who am I kidding? My 'readership' is the equivalent of whispering down a well.) As I was saying, many of you readers will yell at me and say we need things like roads, bridges, a capable military, basic research, etc. To which I say, "You are absolutely right!"
I am not against the things listed in the Constitution as a mandate: protect our shores from invaders, our people from criminal harm, insure that we have a country worth keeping, help fund basic science, the stuff that often slips through the cracks. The Government, Federal, State and Local, has a job and duty to its citizens in making sure our country and the communities within have access to the means to 'pursue happiness'.
Then to get the heck out of the way.
Various things have been added over time. The 'not-tax' of Social Security and the 'not-tax' of Medicare, being a prominent two. If Social Security had remained the trust fund that it was originally intended to be, it would be solvent, and contributions would be less onerous for those currently paying in. They (that's 'You', folks), like my parents, would be paying in for their own retirement. Medicare tax payments, likewise. Instead, it's a Ponzi scheme, and young adults today are rightly bothered by it.
But please, don't lay the blame at my feet. That decision was made in the Sixties, when I was still in grade school. I'll let you guess what president and congress made that decision. I'll help you out: it wasn't JFK. It wasn't Tricky Dick.
And, by and large, I'm not even blaming the Welfare State. Decisions there could be wiser.
What bothers me, is the idea of this enormous pot of money that we can grab out of, without the need to pinch pennies, or even gold pieces. It's as bottomless as a leprechaun's crock of gold.
What a crock!
And even if we reach the bottom of that crock we'll fiddle with the tax brackets, assess a new tax or fee (the secret work-around to 'No New Taxes'), find a new way to have each citizen pony up another buck, and by the time each citizen does so, that's another three-hundred-million dollars.
That's almost Real Money.
If the various levels of governments pinched the pennies as do you and I, choosing chicken instead of steak, tofu instead of chicken, beans and rice instead of anything else, We The Individual People would have a few more dollars with which to make our own choices.
Yet we have people saying that we don't deserve better than beans and rice. THEY do, but we don't. We don't deserve to make our lives a bit more comfortable.
Those on the dole can spend the money they get foolishly or wisely. Those who spend foolishly buy junk food and manage to buy cigarettes (it happens). Those who spend wisely manage better. And yet...
Those who are on the dole who want to get off have nearly impossible walls to climb: if they have a job and don't go over the limit, but manage to save the least little bit to maybe get out of state housing and into an apartment, then they are disqualified from the assistance. Yes they can save money, but (especially at the current housing market) by the time they get first month-last month-security deposit amounts of money, they no longer qualify for assistance and cannot make that leap. In other words, they can earn and save money, but not enough for the day-to-day of the Average Joe, or even the Below Average Joe to make the leap from net taker to net earner and tax payer.
That some do despite the hold-backs is truly miraculous. They truly have a will and determination to succeed. God bless them, and may they have continued success. And may they pay it forward.
I'm going to borrow from Chuck Woolery (you can laugh if you want to), and request that Congress refrain from spending money on metaphorical Albino Squirrels. Disregarding any malfeasance on the part of congress, I am sure there is an abundance of sympathy for those in need, and since we have this great big pot of money, and the American People are a generous bunch (and gullible, besides, what they don't know won't hurt them - except in the pocket book). And Congress puts it in the budget.
At first, this wasn't so bad, I mean, how many Albino Squirrels (metaphorically speaking) are there really? And, look, "Here's the Social Security fund just brimming full of money, surely we can use some of it for this or that, as long as we put it back."
(A Doonesbury story arc comes to mind, not going to search for it, but you go ahead: "The Union Retirement Fund Was Just Sitting There." or words to that effect.)
Two problems have occurred over the years: one, it didn't stop with just one squirrel, and two, the way it would need to be paid back was from taxes. And taxes came from? Yeah, you got it in one guess; us.
So, now we're paying into a fund that is being paid out to retired funders, but also to orphans and widows and disabled and ... out of work, and immigrants, and (I'm gong to use a hateful term here, but it fits) wetback immigrants.
It has gotten bad enough, that not only are the people who are willing to assimilate and become United States citizens taking from our hands, but people who only see the U.S. as a rich uncle with deep pockets have come, not wanting to assimilate, not even wanting to obey our laws (they've broken one law, what's one, or a dozen, more?), to take from our hands.
And it pains me to think that some of our government lawmakers are complicit in this, seeing in these smiling faces voters, or at very least larger districts, to allow themselves to stay in congress. We try to elect responsible men and women who look out for the general welfare of our nation. Instead, we have many of these people using the phrase 'General Welfare' to mean anything they want, to the point of placing the needs of Albino Squirrels (as cute as they are) above the real needs of the country.
Once upon a time our generous nature was expressed in the funding of non-profit organizations, or just simply giving to the person in need. We have deductions from our tax bite for that nowadays, but before the need for the bookkeeping to keep the IRS happy, we simply gave.
We gave to organizations such as The Salvation Army and The United Way. I've given to both, and will do so again. I'll also give what I can, where I can, when I can, to individuals. This includes the homeless; I make the judgement call and I make the decision, not a bureaucrat hired to do so.
But that's not what I was talking about. I could fill the need by creating a company to meet that need. I would sell something that someone else needed. Back in the day it was a barter economy: you had something I wanted, I had something you wanted. We haggled over how many these for how many those, and when we came to an agreement, the deal was struck and stuff swapped hands.
Nowadays I would create something that you might exchange some small green pieces of paper for. I in turn, would swap a number of those green pieces of paper for something I needed or wanted, maybe more raw materials or a machine to help me create the stuff I sell more economically. I might even employ someone to help me make more of the things I make, and give HIM (or her) some of those green pieces of paper so he (or she) can exchange them for things they may want or need.
In short, I could create a business.
In fact, having accumulated some of those green bits of paper into a fairly large stack, a certain Mr. Newman created a company for the sole purpose of giving. But he didn't just build a foundation, per se. He built a company, with himself as the brand, in order to fund, from its profits, his giving forever. Or, at least as long as Newman's Own salad dressing keeps turning a penny now and then.
He did this with a pile of his own money, earned in the movie business. I can do the same thing with whatever I've earned by whatever means.
However, if even the slightest bit of over-and-above a hand-to-mouth existence is removed from me in the form of a tax, then given to someone who doesn't even share my values, I cannot create this business. I cannot employ anyone. I cannot sell my whatsit to anyone, because I cannot make it, I cannot even buy the materials or the tools I might need to get the job done.
But, my government 'friend' will hand me enough to keep my belly filled, just as long as I don't aspire to anything higher than to be a drone, nor even a worker bee.
And I'll eat beans and rice, and like it.
But then, what of the Stanley Newbergs of our nation, the ones who fled persecution to settle in this land of opportunity? Or the ones born here, but dirt poor? Stanley Newberg did well enough to set aside $8.4 million by the time he died; he chose to thank our fine nation for the opportunity by giving two-thirds of that, or $5.6 million, to us, These United States, to spend wisely on his behalf.
And in 1994, it disappeared in under two minutes, flat.
We, as a nation, can do better. Our governance must do better. We need to go back to the speech that President John Kennedy gave back in the early sixties, and take his words to heart:
"Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country."
Not just by paying taxes, but by creating opportunities for others.
Zig Ziglar said it years ago:
"You can have anything you want as long as you help someone else get what they want!"
Not a hand out, but a hand UP.
Yes, We Can!
