20 12 2017

Authored by William Robert Barber

Legislation on the tax bill, pass or fail, is in its last stages of debate. The pros and cons of the issue boil down to what the government is going to keep to sustain the governing bureaucracy, how much will be directed to the qualified people to ease their burden, and what amount is allowed to vest in the pockets of the people.

The contesting of issues amongst the politicians no longer relies upon party affiliation but upon differing ideological beliefs and mores. Conservatives advocate a diminutive government; liberals want to defer all socio-economic concerns to governmental wonks, therefore, a larger government is inherent.

Progressives are practicing socialists that reject the title of socialist as well as the functional reality of their advocacy. However, as demonstrated by President Obama and presidential candidate Hillary, progressives function in a world of fanciful make-believe. Reality, no matter the empirical evidence of its existence, is ignored; my favorite foreign policy example is North Korea.

Class warfare is a favorite topic of progressives because it ensures degrees of chaos and contentiousness.  Interestingly, it is commonly known and sensibly understood that the few always have more in material wealth than the many. The dichotomies between the have less and those that have more are historically blatant. Nonetheless, in the modern world all socio-economic schemes inclusive of socio-equalitarianism and egalitarianism in general results (for the populous) in the loss of individual liberty, personal freedoms, and the establishment of a Kleptocracy managed by armed Kleptocrats.   

The consequence of utilizing taxation as the means of wealth redistribution took form in 1910, wherein, the 16th amendment to the constitution. “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”  Those that have (the few) acknowledged that socio-economic order requires the distribution of their wealth and have agreed that government taxation is the better arbitrator. What they did not count on was the government’s ability to tax excessively. Imagine in 1910 the tax was limited to 6%.

Premised on the egalitarian determinant that those who earn or have more pay more than those who have less is purposely designed to eliminate any taxable obligation to any person earning less than a certain annual amount. The sum of this system is (for those that earn below the taxable minimum) to disenfranchise this, earning-less class, of the citizens from any concern over any political ramifications. Unless threatened by a change in the progressive tax system why vote? Why participate in electing the ruling class?

The true power of a government rests not only in power to tax but also in the wherewithal to pick and choose on the disbursement of tax revenue. For reasons documented and implied, lawful and extralegal, Congress, overwhelmed by the weight of its distorted process, autocratic dysfunction and statutorily compliant corruption has confederated into warring pieces and parts.

However, I do believe if the United States Congress legislates a significant decrease in corporate taxes the nation wins.