To help eliminate our budget/debt problems, the debate includes taxation, increase taxes or decrease taxes the left and right will say respectively. Both will say we have a need for a new tax code, but will not agree on a proposal for a new code. Everyone who manages a checkbook has seen budget problems before and knows how to correct it - reduce expenses and increase income. Everything else we here about this subject beyond these two facts is just noise and should be ignored. The political left and right cannot agree on how to correct this problem. Doing something is also better than doing nothing, which is what this stalemate is giving us now. The left's solution to our problem is to increase taxes on the rich to increase income. Currently the top 20% of income earners pays 80% of the federal tax burden. So do we want them to pay 100%? 110%? 120%? Maybe just write the check every year for the entire cost of government, whatever it is? Clearly this is not the solution. They also consistently disparage the Bush Tax Cuts, as causing income inequality and the deficits we currently enjoy. Yet these tax policies actually reduced taxes at all income levels. Plus, when faced with a chance to end them, the left extended the cuts as a positive factor on the economy. The right wants us to reduce spending and taxes, which is also a poor solution in a recessionary economy. But the truth is we must do both (reduce expenses and increase income), we must do it now and it will not be easy. Untouchable entitlements are the problem and must be restructured. Adding another entitlement, Obamacare, to this mix just makes the problem worse. All the political hot air outside these facts is simply a distraction from the difficult but obvious answer. As to a new tax code - a must. The current tax code is over 60,000 pages long! A 2012 report estimated that it took 6.1 billion hours preparing taxes. What a waste. See the 2013 Income Tax tables for your information.

Misguided and Dangerous Fools, maybe even "Deplorable"?

from The Gray Area:

Mark Weston is, among millions of others today, an example of the foolish, deluded, dangerously misguided and under-informed liberal Democrat. He wrote an article in TIME the other day entitled 65 Million Americans Should Threaten to Not Pay Taxes. He said they should not pay taxes until Democracy is restored.

Obviously a distraught Hillary supporter, Mr. Weston then proceeds to say that "Donald Trump won the electoral vote with about 46% of the popular vote, while Hillary Clinton received about 48%. If the parties stay this evenly divided, another electoral mishap is more likely than not in the next 20 years. ... [there is a] need to amend the Constitution to establish direct presidential elections ... The cry, “No Taxation Without Representation,” inspired America to declare its independence in 1776. It can also lead to a rebirth of democracy in our own time."

This article displays so much ignorance I won't even try to address it all. Here are a few of the big ones:

- We must have "direct Presidential elections" vs the Electoral College system. He focuses only on the two elections in the past 16 years that ended with the popular vote winner losing the Electoral College. In both of which his team lost. This has only happened 5 times in 229 years, 45 elections. The fact is the Electoral College system is genius. It works exactly as the Founders intended, 229 years ago and today. Mr. Weston, and others, should do some research and discover how uninformed they are and how misguided their judgement is on this subject, just because their team lost.

- He talks about fixing the Constitution when Republicans do this again in the future, so his team will win. So can Republicans not pay taxes if Democrats win the electoral college with a minority of the vote? He feels this could never happen. Clearly a shortsighted view. It happened before.

- He should research the concept of "no taxation without representation". His team has 48 of the 100 Senator seats in Congress. Hardly no representation. This is typical of the radical left. Being involved in the discussion doesn't matter. Only being in the majority matters, and then dictating their agenda vs negotiating it with the rest of the country. Sad. And, dangerously tyrannical.

- Mr. Weston says he wants us to change the Constitution so we can a rebirth of democracy in our own time. A common definition of “democracy” is, “Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives” — we are that now. But, the United States is not, nor has it ever been, a direct democracy, in the sense of a country in which laws (and other government decisions or elections) are made predominantly by majority vote. The United States is a constitutional republic. Mr. Weston wants to change that 229 year old fact because in the past 16 years he has been unhappy twice. Crybaby.

- Can't you win a straight up vote, he questions. Yes, Trump did - in 30 states! That's a majority, right! You want to govern the 20 states Hillary won, okay go ahead. You want to govern the 20 major cities Hillary won, okay go ahead. We'll compare results later.

A friend of mine said it this way: Sore losers. Hard to imagine that this article could even be written much less distributed. Our system worked as the framers of the Constitution intended it to work.

That is a gentle critique.

My view? Mark Weston and anyone who agrees with this article are fools. They are misguided and dangerous. The dangerous fools are maybe the worst of our country's citizens. One candidate might call them "deplorable".

More From TIME Magazine:

365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )
Leave a Reply