The health care proposal put forth by Republican congressman, Paul Ryan, has been touted as "courageous." I would like to point out one element that I think makes it very uncourageous and therefore typical once again of the Republican capitalist mindset. It does not propose to raise any taxes, particularly on the wealthy. Instead, it proposes tax cuts to the wealthy and cuts to valuable existing government-funded programs.
One clear way in which we could reduce our national debt is to raise revenue by raising taxes from wealthier Americans. This is a perfectly reasonable and fair principle. If one can afford to pay higher taxes, one should. This because one has been able to earn the income by living in a country that allows the increased earnings; if one benefits from such an allowance, then one should ethically pay a proper percentage of those earnings back to the government in taxes.
Too often the mentality of many of the wealthiest Americans seems to be opposite to this. One way in which our capitalist form of government is not impressive is that the accumulation of wealth can breed selfishness. However, none of us have come by our wealth completely independently. We were fortunate to have parents or other life situations that put us in the fortunate position of being able to earn more money. In other words, no one is successful entirely on their own. We all receive help. So in return for receiving help comes giving help in return through generosity, and generosity in the same form in which it is received, or monetarily. It is a very ethical and reasonable principle that if one benefits by making money in a system that also protects those assets and allows one to make the money in the first place, that one should return a proportionally larger amount in taxes to the provider of that protection, or the government. In other words, if one is able to have the opportunity to acquire wealth and benefit from that ability by the government (there is no police state on earning capital), one should pay a larger share in taxes. It should definitely not be the other way around. Tax cuts are the other way around. Tax cuts leave to hope that the wealthy will spend their tax cuts on goods and services in the economy therefore boosting the economy and indirectly helping those less wealthy ("Trickle-down economics"). However, this is dependent on the person receiving the tax cut to voluntarily spend the money and boost the economy. This is not sufficient. The return of assistance in the form of taxes must be obligatory or law. This method of return should also be welcomed and expected by the citizens, not resented and protested. It is a selfish and childish principle that one would be allowed to keep all their earned capital AND benefit from the protection of that capital by the federal government. (One "can't have it both ways," or "your cake and eat it too.") Therefore, it is a completely fair and equitable system that the federal government would enact law that would require that the percentage of each person's individual taxes would substantially increase along with their increase in earnings. This should be a no-brainer and something that we as Americans would feel proud to do rather than reacting stubbornly and selfishly by bawking at the idea of our taxes being raised. If more of us who were wealthier could change this selfish mindset, we could reduce the national deficit in a fraction of the time it took to accumulate. Unfortunately, the opposite is true. The Republican (and Tea Party; their very name comes from the famed protest of paying more taxes in the "Boston Tea Party") mentality resents the idea of returning a larger percentage of their earnings in taxes. Instead, they indirectly put the burden on those who can afford it less by cutting government programs that help the public thereby raising revenue by saving, or not spending that government money. The problem with that is simple and backwards. It's depriving the country of valuable services (government-funded public services like healthcare, affordable housing, education, research, and public transportation, just to name a few) while allowing the wealthy to remain wealthy at the expense of the rest of the country. It is a very self-centered attitude. It also killing our country as evidenced by the soaring national debt. President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, managed to balance the budget. George W. Bush, a Republican, gave us this huge national debt. Case closed.
So even though Senator Paul Ryan's budget proposal has been called courageous, I contend again that it is only courageous in that it is assertive. Real courage would be if Paul Ryan were to stand up to his Republican colleagues and encourage them to reconsider raising taxes on themselves and other most wealthy Americans to help increase revenue and lower the national debt. That would be courageous indeed!
____________
Link to President Obama's speech on the federal budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/winning-the-future/fiscal-framework?utm_source=email107&utm_medium=image&utm_campaign=fiscal
No comments:
Post a Comment