By now, virtually everyone has come to know that the so-called debt supercommittee has reached an impasse in its attempts to trim the federal deficit by $1.2 trillion by the prescribed deadline. Not that this should come as any great surprise to anyone who has been following the growing trend of divisional faction in the Congress over the last few years but it is telling that almost none of the discussions and proposals tabled associated with this charter have seen the public light of day.
But what will likely become lost in the finger pointing and upcoming campaign rhetoric is that the Congress’ inability to reach compromise on this issue is a reflection of American society’s increasing use of government as a mechanism of authority and leverage to wield against others for personal gain and benefit. Without this Big Government monster that continually conducts its affairs outside the scope of the Constitution and its legitimate role in individuals’ lives there is no great debate to be had, no fiscal crossroads to consider, no arguments to make over whether one group should receive special treatment over another – or worse, at their expense.
Many people like to vilify the wealthy because it is easy to blame others for our own problems or shortcomings in life – and politicians are unequivocal masters of the blame game. But I do not understand how this vilification has grown to such a pseudo-socialistic fervor amongst the general public in recent years. This envy has grown to such contentious proportions that it has become akin to the abusive spouse who kills his significant other because “if I cannot have her, no one can.”
I do not come close to residing in the so-called 1% but I understand that alleged progressive taxes, either income or corporate, nonetheless affect me as a consumer, as an employee, and as an investor at the least. I understand that I do not have a natural, ethical, or otherwise legitimate right to seize the fruits of someone else’s labor – even if I may not agree with how they obtained it (short of actual thievery, of course) – and claim it as my own or give it to someone else for use. Only the person who has earned that income through their own efforts and ingenuity possesses the legitimate right to redistribute it in unconstitutional ways.
Can anyone truly claim that taking a “fair” share from the wealthy and passing it on to other wealthy people through social programs or other spending is somehow magnanimous or that it will not adversely affect them in the middle and lower classes? Do people really believe that this approach to taxation and spending has anything to do with the individual’s welfare rather than with votes, power, corruption, and influence? I am frankly amazed that there are still people in this country that vehemently believe that politicians from one party or another actually care about them.
Remember this when considering the debate going forward: there is no money in a cure, only in a treatment. Politicians offer cures every day – that is what they do for a living. They offer cures to unemployment, poverty, broken education systems, crime, discrimination and numerous other emotive subjects but are vested in ensuring they persist so that there is some base for their political appeal and subsequent power to reside. If these issues were irrelevant, as they surely would be without a Big Government to empower them through action and/or sanctioned action, what need would these politicians satisfy?
This is Demagoguery 101.
Chris Rock said it well (WARNING – EXPLICIT LANGUAGE).