Ron Investigates the Idea of Taxes – An Oppressive Factor
Ron Boat
Tax:
Noun
1. a sum of money
demanded by a government for its support or for specific facilities or
services, levied upon incomes, property, sales, etc.
2. a burdensome charge,
obligation, duty,
or demand.
Verb (used with object)
3. a. to demand a tax from (a person,
business, etc.).
b.
to demand a tax in consideration of the possession or occurrence of
(income, goods, sales,
etc.), usually
in proportion to the value of money involved.
4. to lay a burden on; make serious demands
on: to
tax one's resources.
5. to take to task; censure; reprove; accuse: to tax one
with laziness.
In looking up the definition of “tax,” I found it thought-provoking
that each is laden with such negativism. Insupportable terms of onerous meaning
like “money demanded,” a “burdensome charge or obligation,” to “demand” or “lay
a burden” or “take to task.” What a way to start a concept of revenue… or just
a discussion.
In light of the recent fiscal cliff (or physical depending
on your reaction to the D.C. fiasco), I thought it worth a moment to reflect on
our taxes, their effect and consequences. It’s true that none of us relish the
thought of April 15th, yet we realize that a certain amount of money needs to
be collected for such things as running the government, paying our military,
building ships, planes and roads. It’s a requisite participation of a society
where we all benefit and need to contribute.
America was born in strife, disagreement and violent
conflict over… taxes. Local taxes in the colonies were low but the British
Parliament (our government at the time) was belligerent and intrusive in its obsession
to collect what we had over here to run their government and buy what they wanted
over there. And they did it with disregard for the benefits we didn’t see for ourselves. To pay for a
local road down the street here makes sense. To pay for a new carriage for the
king in England wasn’t so popular.
Hence started the list of taxes and political-economic rift
that propelled us into war and ultimately freedom from England.
·
The Stamp
Act – 1765 / Passed by the Parliament and required all legal documents,
permits, commercial contracts, newspapers, wills, pamphlets, and playing cards
in the American colonies to carry a tax stamp. It was to defray the cost of
maintaining the military presence protecting the colonies. Something not
exactly perceived as a necessity by Americans who rose up in strong protest,
beginning the argument of "No Taxation without Representation."
Boycotts forced Britain to repeal the stamp tax, but convinced many British
leaders it was essential to tax the colonists on “something” to demonstrate the sovereignty of Parliament.
·
The Sugar
Act – 1764 / Taxes on Sugar, cloth and coffee that came here but didn’t
export from Britain. They wanted their share of our life that they weren’t even
involved in. [Sounds like our current gas taxes]
·
The
Townshend Revenue Act – 1767 / Two tax laws passed by Parliament, and proposed
by Charles Townshend, Chancellor of the Exchequer. They placed a tax on common
products imported into the American Colonies, such as lead, paper, paint,
glass, and tea. In contrast to the Stamp Act, the laws were not a direct tax
that people paid, but a tax on imports that was collected from the ship's
captain when he unloaded cargo. The Acts also created three new admiralty
courts to try Americans who ignored the laws. [You can see where this was going.
Import taxes and ultimate legal oppression of citizens, IRS?].
·
The Tea
Act – 1773 / This received the royal approval on tea. The act was designed
to undercut tea smugglers and was to benefit of the East India Company, in
which England didn’t own shares of ownership but had indirect control. This
single Act (or tax) prompted protests and became the prominent foundation of…
The Boston Tea Party which angered Britain to the point of war with us in 1775.
So from our very beginning, taxes, tariffs and monetary
impositions have indeed had their effect on the common people of the land and
ultimately resulted in our break from England and freedom. The citizenry of
then should see what “taxation WITH
representation is like now.” It’s still not a popular annual event.
In 1862, to support the Civil War effort, Congress enacted
the nation's first income tax law. It was a forerunner of our modern income tax
in that it was based on the principles of graduated, or progressive taxation
and of withholding income at the source. During the Civil War, a person earning
from $600 to $10,000 per year paid tax at the rate of 3%. A far penetrating
scream from the total rate of 90% just 100 years later and today’s rate around 50%.
Today there seem to be two areas of passionate, often obsessive
discussions that anger Americans when debating taxes. Areas which are growing
and diverging in their use and meaning to the public who pays – or doesn’t pay
them. Areas vocally evident and extensively exposed in the reality of our
recent election.
First, most agree there are too many taxes. We’re
particularly dismayed because what money we do send to Washington is wasted,
frivolously squandered and even lost: Billions each year being unaccounted for.
Even the heads of many government agencies can’t tell you how many vehicles
they really own… or where they are. And the GAO is routinely unable to account
for money and resources in the military, defense departments and others. And yet
they want even more to play their expensive administrative Monopoly games.
Add to the “missing in action” you’ll find millions being
spent for what seems more like personal enrichment than requisite resources. Agencies
who demand a better resort instead of a hotel for meetings, accoutrements
befitting royalty bringing newer and nicer cars, first class travel, bigger
well-appointed offices and more. It’s a systematic harvesting of questionable
reimbursements, benefits and other economic advantage; the people’s over
extended credit cards run amuck if you will. No wonder average people become
hesitant in their “contributions” to a bunch of governmental, ideological trogs
who work less than they do but live the life of Riley at our hard earned
expense.
The second dog in this fight has a contention bone that
represents a large number of people who refuse to “contribute” or are unable to
through reasons of either joblessness or laziness. With welfare growing at a distressing
pace, food stamp recipients nearing 50,000,000, and so many unable to pay taxes
for lack of employment, America is an economic scale tipping toward government
dependency. A condition that is fiscally irresponsible and precipitously
unsustainable. Half the people are supporting the other half…. through taxes.
Money collected and redistributed for one irritating, vexatious reason or
another.
Ah, redistribution. Remember that term? “Take from the rich
and give to the… poor(?) But hey, when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you’ll always
have the support of Paul. It’s Socialism at its best when you can give away the
worth of so many to placate the wanton desires of others less willing to
participate in an equal society. It’s the dream come true of dictators who want
more control, more lauding and praise from the willing yet unknowing masses
they subjugate.
But there’s a lesson to be learned and
America will soon find itself living the manifestation of Margaret Thatcher’s
truthful expression. “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out
of other people's money.” But our problematic reality is that rarely do
governments – even ours – look far enough down the money road to realize that
you can’t tax, tax, tax without consequences of your actions. They seem to
think there’s some unlimited supply, some unrestrained never-ending wellspring
of bucks coming their way. And of course with those ongoing windfalls come
power.
The associated point of this is that benefits
and availability of taxes are not only limited but limiting. A Socialistic
leader or complicit governing body fails to rightly observe that taking money
from people limits people. It reduces the resources with which a business can use
to remain financially stable and even grow. It takes from people and redirects
the very thing that an economy needs to remain solvent and stable, developing
and growing: Money.
The more a family pays in income tax,
property tax, sales tax, gas tax, capital gains tax, social security and
Medicare taxes, and more local taxes you can count with a 200 foot long abacus,
then the less money they can devote to dining out, a new or second car, a new
house, clothing, a bigger TV, new furniture; Things that people actually work
toward AND which supports the economy. Forget about education expenses, the
medical emergencies, repairs, and other unexpected costs of just living that
you can’t pay for if…you’ve paid too much toward to guy who finds it too
inconvenient to work or the woman with 9 kids from 7 men but no means of
support... except you and me.
Taxes are a part of life, an obligation of a responsible
society as a cohesive, productive assemblage living and working together. But
when taxes become burdensome, a demand, a limit or censure on people’s lives, then
it’s time to examine the use to which our funds are expended. When they take
away from people their desires or rights to participate in life, their quality
of life for themselves and their families, and preclude them from meeting basic
essentials, then it’s time for an answerable examination. A review before
action becomes the next step.
Many say that 50% is a fair total of all taxes to be paid
but really… to say that you work and slave sometimes 6 or 7 days a week to only
start making money for yourself as compensation for your hard work in July
every year? And many in some states are paying higher totals of 55, 60% and
more of their hard earned wages. When does it really end? When people work
totally and solely for the government and the government gives all to people in
payment as housing, food, medical care, and life’s substances? That’s called
Communism. An economic system where the government owns the factors of
production and decides the allocation of resources and what products and
services will be provided.
Karl Marx agreed with Louis Blanc (a French
"utopian Socialist") in how labor and income should be
managed: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to
his needs." But that is not
America. Not the way we were founded, led to believe, brought up and practiced
our work, or pledged our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.
Is this where
America is headed? Are taxes part of the controlling, limiting factor purposely
imposed that decides our future? I pray not but they’re increasingly intertwined
with our daily way of life, our work, our societal discourse. We’re quickly
approaching a crossroads where we’ll be forced to certainly decide how we’re to
live our lives. Some say this past election was the most important in our
history and yet that group of 50% that lives off the other 50% decided they
like “getting” more than “working.” The Obama phone was a great thing and
having the government pay your healthcare, food bill, food stamps, subsidized housing,
Pell grants, children’s head start, special allowance and tax credits, cold
fuel payments, guardian’s allowance, maternity expenses, general welfare/public
assistance/financial and community care grants, and more is quickly becoming an
expected good thing for the masses - their new life du jour. But someone has to
pay for these communal favors.
Will this continue
the spiral from which we can’t recover?
I wonder… How soon
before we run out of other people’s money?
