In a recent survey, ten out of ten people polled this afternoon said they should not pay for my cheeseburger and fries at McDonald's simply because they had $50 in their pockets and I only had $4. When asked, "why not," each person polled simply responded, "because it's not your money!" Surprisingly, 4 out of these same 10 people identified themselves as "democrats." When the poll also included the phrase, "share the wealth, man," 9 of the 10 people polled exclaimed, "go to hell."
On the other hand, while engaging in a debate with friends online, 4 out of 5 self-described democrats agreed with the sentiment that, "those who earn more should pay more." One even suggested that we should, as a society, "eat the rich." As it turns out, it wasn't my money after all, no matter how hungry I was, and if someone had decided to feed me out of sheer kindness, I would have had to politely decline and thank them for their generosity. FULL DISCLOSURE: My family and I have been on food stamps. I, myself, have gone to the Salvation Army to ask for food. These are worthwhile programs for people who need a hand up, and I am not suggesting that anyone tell a hungry person to "go to hell." I'm not saying that you should go down to The Bowery and kick the bums and winos and tell them to get a job. What I'm really talking about here is attitude. Read this again; "Those who earn more should pay more." If you agree, tell me why. Then tell me how much is enough. Then tell me why I should strive to earn more if you're just going to take it away from me to cover my "fair share." And don't give me any of that crap about how I benefited from public schools, or how the police are protecting me, or about how much a battleship costs. We each take our equal share of those services, so why should you pay more and I less, or vice versa? Why do you want to tax Joe The Plumber until he's as poor as you? Do you want to spread the wealth, or spread the misery? It seems to me that some people take the phrase, "promote the general Welfare," from the preamble of our constitution, and broaden it just a bit too much. Are you your brother's keeper? Yes. Should you pay your brother's rent? Only if you truly want to , out of compassion, and not because the Government threatens to take your property and your earnings if you don't. I thought being rich was a part of the American Dream. I thought we were all supposed to aspire to be successful. My teachers always taught me that if I worked hard and applied myself, I could do anything I wanted. Not one of them ever said, "and when you do, we'll call you a villain, steal your money, give it to people who didn't earn it, and spend it on stuff we want." Teachers' Unions weren't as deeply entrenched back then, I guess. Think back to when you were a kid and someone asked, "what do you want to be when you grow up?" What did you answer? Did you say, "I want to serve the state and give as much as I can so that all people can benefit from the fruits of my labor?" No. You said, "I want to be a doctor!" Maybe it was a lawyer, or an astronaut, or a chef, or an artist. You wanted to earn a living doing something you were passionate about, and you wanted to have as much wealth as your skill would allow. You didn't want a brown Mazda hatchback with vinyl seats and an AM radio, you wanted the Porche, all leather interior, with the CD changer in the trunk. But you never got one. You never became a doctor. You're jealous of people that did. So now you want to take that Porche, take all the money, and make the doctor heal you for free. He owes you. Besides, he can afford it, right? Well, so what if he can? If you raise his taxes, he hires one less nurse. If you take a chunk out of his salary and spread it around, he goes out to eat a little less and doesn't tip any waitresses. If you raise his taxes, he decides not to buy a new car and changes his own oil. If you raise his taxes and not your own, you are stealing. It's not your money.
No comments:
Post a Comment