BEST OF JIM COOK
November 16, 2006
DRINKING THE LIBERAL POISON
The first thing liberals want to do when elected to office is raise
taxes. They especially want to punish the rich. In fact, they prefer
taxes to be so high they become a disguised means of confiscation. They
overlook the fact that people with money provide the savings, capital
and investments necessary to foster new business and grow existing
enterprise. High taxes are a penalty on progress.
Recently, Hilary Clinton told a group of wealthy people, "We’re going
to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Of course,
the liberals and socialists want to determine exactly what the public
good is going to be. So far, their efforts on behalf of the public good
have led to one failed socialist scheme after another. The philosopher
Leonard Read wrote, "statism is but socialized dishonesty; it is
feathering the nests of some with feathers coercively plucked from
others on a grand scale. There is no moral difference between the act of
a pickpocket and the progressive income tax or any other social
program." The writer, Craig Cantoni put it this way. "Those on the
receiving end of a public good like the public good more than those on
the paying end."
Liberals believe an inexhaustible fund exists that can be tapped
endlessly to pay for government social programs. Tax the rich and give
it to a long line of moochers, pork barrel hustlers and ne’er-do-wells.
These funds would otherwise have been employed as additional capital
indispensable to economic progress. When taxes become too high, capital
is consumed rather than accumulated, and profits, wage rates and living
standards fall. The progressive tax system favored by the left
eventually liquidates itself. It kills the goose that laid the golden
egg.
The great economist Murray Rothbard put it this way, "….soaking the
rich to subsidize the poor, does no such thing. In fact, soaking the
rich would have disastrous effects, not just for the rich but for the
poor and middle classes themselves. For it is the rich who provide a
proportionately greater amount of saving, investment capital,
entrepreneurial foresight, and financing of technological innovation
that has brought the United States to by far the highest standard of
living – for the mass of the people – of any country in history. Soaking
the rich would not only be profoundly immoral, it would drastically
penalize the very virtues: thrift, business foresight, and investment,
that have brought about our remarkable standard of living."
All of the huge, expensive social programs run by government are
hatched by liberals. Public housing, Medicare, the varied subsidies of
the "great society" all came from the left. This orgy of vote buying
worked to the benefit of liberals who were rewarded by voters with
public office. The other side took notice and began to climb on board.
Now conservatives promote huge Federal subsidies. It’s become a race to
see who can come up with unique ways to dispense benefits. Republicans
have drunk the liberal poison.
The founding fathers established a government to keep us safe inside
the country and to protect us from enemies without. In a modern society
we justify adding government protection of health, safety and the
environment. Beyond that, it’s all subsidies and spending. We take money
from those who earn it and give it to those who don’t. Would you
voluntarily donate your money to a major corporation to subsidize
gasohol or give it to abusive mothers whose delinquent children may
someday be a threat to your safety?
Subsidies are ruining us because they are morally bankrupt. They
corrupt what they touch. They cause the huge government deficits that
must be financed through raw inflating. When you superimpose the cost of
war and other emergencies on a runaway social budget, you can be certain
the dollar will be debased. The liberals would pare down defense
spending, and you may or may not disagree. However, their bias is to
always increase social spending. That’s why subsidies are running away,
and they will do so until the government or the taxpayers go broke,
whichever comes first.