"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
-- quote attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler
Study the tax package plans of both of this year's major presidential candidates and it becomes frighteningly clear that our nation is headed down the road described above by the 18th century Scottish philosopher/historian.
But first, take note of President Bush's tax cut programs of 2001 and 2003. Although denounced by critics for favoring the rich, the programs were, in fact, well-laden with tax credits benefiting low- and middle-income families. When all was said and done with the Bush plan, about 33 percent of U.S. households paid no federal income taxes whatever -- sharply up from about 20 percent of households being exempt from the 1950s to the 1990s, according to the Tax Foundation.
Needless to say, people who pay no taxes have no particular interest in cutting them. Indeed, because such people often benefit from the government's wealth transfers, they actually have a special interest in having taxes go up.
This accelerating trend of taking more and more families off the federal tax rolls -- often followed by states removing them from the rolls too -- has been pursued by both political parties.
And they say there's no bipartisanship?
The Tax Foundation has also taken a close look at John McCain's and Barack Obama's proposed tax packages -- and although they differ in several significant respects, they both dramatically boost the proportion of people who don't pay any federal income tax: from Bush's 33 percent to 43 percent under McCain's plan and to 44 percent under Obama's.
It appears that no matter who wins Tuesday's election, our nation will continue in the direction of soon having 50 percent or more of unproductive non-taxpayers leaning on the 50 percent or fewer productive taxpayers. That could get us to the dangerous tipping point Tytler speaks of -- when democracy begins to deteriorate into dictatorship.
Comments
TruckinRanger, that's very funny. LOL. Obama will also increase the rain , bringing down the number of wet people.
When I posted this quote last year and attributed it to Tyler, several clueless lefties took delight in telling me how wrong I was and each gave me the "true" name that should have been credited with the quote...all four of them. The point they missed is the one made by the quote. It's in danger of becoming true this election. Will our country really slide into socialism? We'll certainly have a hard push in that direction if the msm and polls are right for a change.
Sorry Pat, but two major errors here...you're right that the quote in this form may be attributed to this guy, but its origin is ??? We all know, just won't say it for fear of being labeled SOCIALIST with the pansy French guy who said it...that's a joke and 2) there is one word here that makes this whole piece DISGUSTING AND DIVISIVE...the greatest majority of people, the working poor, that don't pay taxes are PRODUCTIVE citizens toiling away in the businesses and industries owned by the stockpayer and wealth class. To assume that the majority of hard working, REAL American, mostly white people in this country (waiters, janitors, clerks, nurses aides, fast food workers, etc) are unproductive makes you and anyone else that thinks that they are less than you because they only indirectly contribute to the wealth of others b/c their wages only allow hand to mouth spending...if you think that, you're the problem...DISGUSTING !!
Dr Gunby, if a person prepares themselves to be a janitor or fast food worker as a life's ambition, their goals are less than mine. Not mentioning it won't change the situation. However, most of the jobs you listed are held by people passing through on the way to their careers. Their income and station in life will change as they move up. If there are some satisfied with the bottom of the barrel, then why should they be rewarded? Your post comes across as very humane, but is actually enabling.
Pat, there are certainly differences in knowledge, skills and abilities between people. Because someone does not possess the attributes or intergenerational wealth transfer to easily move ahead in society does not mean that they are enabled by not paying taxes. Your premise is false. Most of these positions are not transitional. They are the life lot of millions that your party does not give a damn about except as cogs in the corporate wheel. Why should you and I with our many advantages and fine educations not give back to those without the same opportunities. Don't label all good hardworking Americans as enabled. Most of them work harder than you or I ever have or ever will.
As the philosopher said, when those receiving money from the government outnumber those who are paying, all will be lost. You can only burn the trailer steps for firewood once. Dr. Gunby, your post came right out of the Communist Manifesto. Congratulations on coming out.
Dr G, please. Not transitional? These people prepare themselves to be lifelong fast food service people because of inherited wealth or mental attributes? Or does maybe cultural acceptance and government enabling have just a little to do with it? Your expectations are much lower then mine. I guess perspective is everything. However, time after time, when more is expected, more is achieved. Enabling seems to be addictive on both ends. I think you may need to have these non-achievers so you can feel "compassionate" for them.
When the very few are expected to support the majority, changes begin. One's will to strive for more success is destroyed on both sides of the equation. Should we help those who are unable to help themselves? Absolutely. Should we help those who choose not to help themselves? We won't for long. If the disabled, elderly and very young make up about 30% of the population, isn't that enough weight for all to carry????
Pat and Riverman, we are now having a conversation and not screaming at each...in an e-fashion. River, I in no advocate paying all my money to the govt as communism would dictate. Let's talk, not sling extremes that are not applicable. What is the difference in the couple of percent in my taxes. Well, let's see, I have to go to Hawaii instead of Melbourne this year for vacation. Big deal...people have to make decisions about medicine or eating. Your side of the argument continually judges the majority by the extreme of what happens at the bottom and that is welfare queen freeloaders. They are few and far between. I know more lucrative white collar criminals that "steal" far more than the govt ever gives away to poor people. They're called doctors and it is Medicare/Medicaid overuse and abuse. I don't use that example to change the topic, just to illustrate, that it is all proportional. The poor and so called enabled did not drive the financial limo into the tree as it is now. Pat, THESE PEOPLE...there mostly good, hard working REAL white Americans !! Is that ok with you?
Why is color an issue, Dr G? My point is that those that prepare themselves to spend their lives in a minimum wage job can do exactly the same thing by not preparing at all. We all go to the "free government high school", or something somewhat comparable. Any effort prepares us for more then the bottom of the barrel. Enabling seems to fight all preparation. This approach doesn't call for a reward. What you give your money to should be your decision. If you wish to give an extra 5% or 10% each year, you should be allowed to. You shouldn't be forced to.
Dr. G, the Medicare fraud is one more example of government contributing to scandal by making guarantees for payment. But to the point, progressive income taxes already place a tremendous responsibility on the wealthy. The person making a million dollars a year in salary drives on the interstate highway as the person paying no income tax does. What if instead of sneaking the money out as is done now with taxes, drivers had to pay at a toll booth depending on their income? Lots of the poorer would be waived past, while the guy making a million would be stopped and made to pay a tremendous amount for the same privilege to drive down the highway.
I did not say that color was an issue. I was asking you if it was an issue. For many on these forums and a large part of the Repub base, they "other" anyone that is not like them. So it is ok for the govt to take whatever portion of my income in taxes for Medicare and pay docs that game the system instead of paying other types of govt benefit. "Those that prepare themselves..."...There are a normally distributed number of jobs that are filled by a normally distributed number of qualified and selected people. Everyone can't be a chief. There have to be lots of Indians and the greatest majority will NEVER be chiefs. When you make it in America, it is b/c of your effort, your training, your previous financial endowment and the opportunities that are present b/c America is great country. When you make it, it doesn't hurt to give back. All we want is to roll back the Bush taxes, adjust the code to eliminate loopholes.
Obama is a closet dictator and you can see that from the way he treats those who disagree with him. Electing him will only hasten the day that the United States as a democracy no longer exists. However, the 'messiah,' Obama won't be among the starving--he will have collected everyone's money in the form of taxes.
DrG, Give back, not taken back. Preparedness isn't a color issue, it's cultural. Concerted effort toward a goal isn't about chiefs and indians, it's about individual effort. Your comments sound very charitable, but they continue to come across as having very low expectations and very low standards that are okay for the nonachievers. In short, an enabling attitude. I also feel it's okay, but not worthy of reward.
Just keep reading patriciathomas and one will discover why the American people understand the right-wing has lost touch with the common man. Patriciathomas likes taking the easy argument of blame and hate. Her ambitious right-wing has miserably failed and now their response is to blame it on working Americans. Classic.
Mable, how does Obama treat those that disagree with him? I don't get your pt...do you really believe that all of everyone's money will be taken in taxes by Prez O. If you do, I certainly will never respond to another or read another of your post, cause if you believe that, you are truly ignorant (see dictionary...just don't know, that you don't know)
Some of these posts remind me of the woman that said she is voting for NObama because she won't have to work anymore, pay her house payments and won't have to worry about putting gas in her car. OR the students that said they were voting for NObama because he is black and it's time for a black president. AND these people are allowed to vote.
So southerner, does that make the majority of Obama voters that stupid as that woman? Don't judge us by a few ignorant people and I won't judge you by some of the racist and ignorant stuff we've seen at some Mc/Pal rallies
dr... Do you read and understand? Doesn't it say some?
We must also remember the NObama followers in Harlem that think the policies of McCain are those of NObama. They also think Sarah is running as the VP for NObama. AND these people are allowed to vote. Doesn't it mean, when we vote, that we are informed, know the policies and issues of the candidates? Doesn't look like that is what is happening in this election.
Got me southerner, you did say some...by bad, but then in your very next post you cite some extreme example as if that is representative of most Obama supporters. So let me paint the brush with what I see here in NC of all Repubs, most all Repubs are tobacco chewin', beer belly havin', trailer dwellin', pickup drivin', rebel flag wavin' imbiciles...does that describe all Mc supporters? NO !! and neither do those extreme examples describe 99.5% of Obama supporters...that number is my guess.
hey drgruby...Well educated..well informed ..hard working tax paying..business owners...wanting LESS government control in their lives... This describes a McCain voter trust me you can not say that about most barry followers.
Of course I can Karma...There are lots of industries that will do very well with Prez O...healthcare, research and development, education, green tech, etc...there are some that will not do as well as the pendulum swings the other way. As much of the reason for O being elected is the [filtered word] poor mgt your party has shown the last 8 years. You'll elected Bush...you're getting what you deserved and how does it feel...like I felt the day after Ohio was given to him. I got over that and accepted him as the prez and you'll will have the same chance to accept O, but I doubt if many of you will.
Dr. G, The whole point of the missed masses is, that with a DEM controlled Congress and Whitehouse, the nation will not prosper at the hands of the Masses imbued with the wealth of the Fortitudinal Few. The money will funnel back through the Economy and wind up back once more in the hands of the Thrifty. Just like so much prime rib through a hog. Then, failing to enrich the masses once again, the torch shall be passed to a new firebrand who shall once more illuminate the Darkness of civilization with the Rhetoric of "CHANGE". The Rotational cycle of this currency will generate Great Volumes of TAX Revenues for the DEMs to wrangle their Counterparts for control of. In the end, the wealthy will retain the wealth,the poor will barely sustain themselves, and the DEMs will perch like gods, upon the pillars of Democracy, and Proclaim themselves the protectors of the Downtrodden. When all in all, the DEMs perpetuate this Cycle for the intimacy of POWER and preserve poverty in perpetuity for the empowerment of their own selfish endeavors. They Prey upon the Greed of those they enslave to enrich themselves in a never ending cycle of dominion and call it Governance.
Nice verbosity Tujeez, and I'm impressed from someone that relishes in verbosity...i'm not sure what Repubs call governance, b/c you'll haven't recently shown that you could do it. You're right that Dems have taken the poor and minority vote for granted. Repubs have a similar group...you know those guns and religion clingons...that's a joke...the big O should have chosen those words more wisely...
If giving a state to a candidate (your words) is an example of the voting process, you can be asssured that ACORN will be right in the middle of "giving a state to a candidate". Giving us 4 more yrs of the past 2 yrs (with the dims in charge) will be disastrous. NObama, pelosi and reid will only have 2 yrs, if they continue their power hungry destruction policies. Just wait until the unions institute their plan for no private votes, they institute the un-fairness doctrine, they stop the off shore drilling, bankrupt coal companies, take control of your 401K's and pensions, etc., etc. Be careful what you wish for - you may not like what you're going to get.
The DEMs call it "Government, OF, BY and FOR the People" it is in reality Government Of the people and By the People FOR the Sustenance of the Governance.
OH, they haven't taken it for granted Dr.G. They have ensured themselves Governance by preserving mass poverty. The Constituency they KEEP. They keep the poor poor, so they can retain dominion. If there were no poor, they would have no basis in power. And they would fade from existence. The proverbial"Crutch" that keeps itself necessary by continually rebreaking your leg.
That is your plight, and your prospect, all in one. Great future don't you think?
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
