Cosmoline
Agreed! And the GOP exists as the party of welfare, the party of Socialism, the party of the outstreched palm, the party of taxation, and the party of increasinly larger gov'ment. The difference is, with the GOP the welfare goes to mega corporations, the taxation falls on the poor, and different parts of the gov'ment get bigger.
Where to begin, where to begin ...
The Democrats exist as the new Massahs and the Democratic party as the new plantation. They want to tax everyone who they consider "rich" to give those funds to those they consider "poor". They are buying the "poor" vote just as surely as if they were handing out a check with every vote cast.
The "poor" in America own cars, TVs, VCRs, computers, washers and dryers, and live in some kind of housing. The poor (not the "poor") in other nations have none of the above including the housing. They live in shantys built of corrugated sheet metal that every time there is a storm the death toll is mainly attributable to the sheet metal flying about.
Taxing the rich is a disincentive to them to expand their businesses, hire those "poor" people, and stifles their creativity. Giving the monies gleaned to the "poor" is a disincentive to them to attempt to better themselves as all they have to do is sit back and wait for the mailman.
How many jobs have you gotten from a "poor" guy?
The Ultimate Solution is here
But let's be fair, shall we? Let's do the following so everyone will be equal and the upper and lower classes will be eliminated forever.
Let's have legislation that everyone in America, from the oldest to the youngest, will receive $100,000 per year, tax free, every year, year-after-year. Anyone who earns over $100,000 per year would have all of those excess funds confiscated by a 100% tax. Anyone who earns anything less than $100,000 per year -- from $0 to $99,999 -- would be subsidized the entire amount lacking -- up to $100,000.
What could be fairer than that? Everyone has the same amount of money. Everyone has the same opportunities. Everyone can own what they really want. A just born child could look forward to having his/her first $100,000 on their first birthday. By college, they would have $1,800,000 for college. Everyone would drive a new car. Everyone would live in their own home. Everyone could aford prescriptions and medical care.
Wouldn't they?
OF COURSE NOT!
The earners would have no incentive to earn if they will get what those who sit on their a-- and produce nothing get. They could sit on their a-- and get the same thing.
Manufacturers would go bankrupt as the workforce pared off to their new Lazy-Boy anf watched TV all day. Management would see no benefit in making the company more profitable.
Stores would have no goods to sell as the manufacturers fell by the wayside. Those stores would close their doors as what's the use of investing their $100,000 in goods to sell if all they can earn back from those goods is their original investment?
And that kid with the $1.8 Million for college? S/he would have no incentive to go to college. What's the use? College used to be so you could earn a bigger paycheck and live better than those not so inclined. Now they don't have to go to college. They can just sit home and wait for the mailman like everyone else.
So when you cheer against the producers in the name of the "little guy", there are consequences to be met. When the takers of the largess exceed the producers of the largess you are finished.
There is a great quote by Alexander Tyler:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy....
The world’s great civilizations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back again into bondage.
-- Alexander Tyler, Scottish historian (c 1770)
We are somewhere between complacency and apathy now. Selfishness came with the Great Society.
