Articles Comments

SENTRY JOURNAL » Barney Frank, Joe Biden, tax code, Taxes, Uncategorized » When a Necessary Evil Becomes an Absolute Evil

When a Necessary Evil Becomes an Absolute Evil

For far too long the “right” in this country has taken a weak stance on taxes.  Their arguments have been centered on the economic benefits of lower taxes but they have completely ignored one aspect of taxation…that they are immoral. 

The debates over the last few weeks have fortified this stance.  Taxation may be necessary, but I feel compelled to explain how that necessary evil has become immoral. 

For years we have heard the liberals in this nation shove down our throat to the point of nausea that we are equal and must be treated equally.  We begin to feel sick because the very notion of the argument necessitates that we on the right don’t believe in equality.  Nausea sets in because the left’s idea of equality isn’t about equal opportunity, but equal outcomes.  The gag reflex and rise of the uvula occurs when we realize the hypocrisy they display.

Dwell on this for a moment.  In 2009 our tax code was 67,204 pages, had 1,638 different tax forms, and requires an IRS estimated 37 hours for each person to prepare the basic short form.  I cannot begin to guess how much longer and complicated it is or will become due to Obamacare.  Why is our taxation process this difficult?  The reason is simple – to treat us according to our tax bracket group.

From the moment you pick up your tax form you are being identified by a group of people identified by your government.  You fall under a specific set of laws and codes that only your group falls under.  You didn’t write these laws, you weren’t asked about these codes.  Your government has done these things and in doing so has set you in a group measured by their income and therefore political pull. 

One of the many downfalls of this system is that circumstances change political fallout and therefore tax laws.  Whichever group has the most political potential tends to get the better deal.  Right now the middle class are the focus of our economic and political issues.  If you want to get elected you cannot raise taxes on them…so both sides promote tax breaks for the middle class.  When the middle class is doing well the polarity increases with the courting of either the rich or poor.  The rich get more write-offs or the poor get a larger return (which shouldn’t be called a return since they usually get more than was ever taken). 

In the end, we aren’t taxed equally, we are taxed based on what economic group is most like or disliked by the politicians. In order to comply with such a fragile and focused stance we must write a lot of law.  Joe Biden knows this.  He stated on Meet the Press that businesses don’t care about the taxes on the rich, they care about extensions on businesses.  Absolutely true!  They care about the taxes that affect the group their government has put them in – a group that is treated differently than other groups. 

The leftists would normally call such inequalities “income discrimination”; but not here. It’s easy to write off inequalities when the wealthy get the blunt of the blade.  The American people seem to be okay with the idea of receiving more benefits and bigger tax returns while the rich get higher tax rates.  This redistribution of wealth, however, is immoral.  The fact that we’re debating how much money is “enough” before we can start taking more from them than we do everyone else is wrong.  How rich must someone be before it is okay for me to mug them in the street?  Is my individual effort any worse than a government effort?  I would argue that it isn’t worse because they have a greater chance to resist me.  Who can stop our government from taking what they deem “taxable”. 

Barney Frank recently let us in on his philosophy about your money; he has more claim to it than your heirs do and more say in how it spent after you’re gone than you do.

In fact, the federal government should have less of a claim to your money than ANYONE! 

It is time we stop arguing by the numbers and start arguing with a morality based platform.  It is WRONG for the federal government to treat us differently based on our successes, or punish/reward us monetarily based on our income or lack thereof…but they do, and they will continue to as long as we allow it.


Written by

Yeah, I tweet. If you want to follow me on Twitter, just click on the link below. I hope you do.

Filed under: Barney Frank, Joe Biden, tax code, Taxes, Uncategorized · Tags: , , , , ,

opinions powered by
  • Steve Dennis December 21, 2010 at 5:12 AM

    Great post RHM, it is great to see you guys back up and running again. That Barney Frank video sums up the left on taxes perfectly. The left tends to divide us into groups–race, gender, and class–in an effort to play us against each other in order to get re-elected, and they do this on a number of issues, but nobody is really looking out for the people.
    Steve Dennis recently posted..Harry Reid takes the 1 trillion spending bill off of the tableMy Profile

  • Colin December 21, 2010 at 5:36 AM

    Excellent stuff RHM. I would like to add some facts that are peripheral to the argument:

    You gave us excellent statistics on our tax code, and I would like to add to it, with stats on the compliance costs of our gargantuan system, to wit:

    the IRS estimates Americans spend 6.6 billion hours per year filling out tax forms—including 1.6 billion hours on the 1040 form alone. In 2002 Americans spent roughly $194 billion dollars on tax compliance. That amounts to 20 cents of compliance cost for every dollar collected by the tax system.

    Think about the lost productivity those 6.6 billion hours represent. Or the added 20% tax the government forces on business primarily so they are “compliant”. It’s one thing to demand tribute from your subjects, its quite another to make it hard for them to do so.

    To me this is the perfect example of why government should stay the hell out of business – they just don’t understand it. Business knows the best way to get people to give you money is to make it as easy for the the customer as possible to do so. How many ways do you have to buy something at Wal-Mart? Cash, check, credit-card, debit-card, gift-card. If Wally world was run by the government, you could pay with a credit-card, but then there would be a 2 dollar convenience fee, oh and you would have to call an 800 number because they would use a third-party “payment processing company.” If you had cash they would accept it, but it had to be exact change. Check would be the preferred method because we all know how Americans love to write checks nowadays (hint, I don’t even know where my checkbook is).
    Colin recently posted..Funny Video of the Day – Dec 21stMy Profile

  • LD Jackson December 21, 2010 at 5:53 AM

    Every time I see a video of Barney Frank, I am reminded of how much I dislike and distrust him. I just love how he seems to think that heirs to an estate have no right to that money because they have not worked for or earned it. He is a very unpleasant and unsavory character and to hear him say that is very irritating.
    LD Jackson recently posted..Is “Illegal Immigrant” An Unconstitutional TermMy Profile

  • Doomed December 21, 2010 at 6:44 AM

    taxation is class war(FEAR).

    “The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them
    between the millstones of taxation and inflation.”

    Right now the Progressive administration is keeping unemployment high and are printing money and using federal money to buy back our own bonds in an effort to keep interest rates low.

    Their very economic policies are to TAX and to raise inflation. To crush the rich while subsidizing the working class and poor.

  • Bunkerville December 21, 2010 at 7:15 AM

    The worst is the confiscation of the family farms via the estate tax. It is almost impossible to borrow on raw land to pay the tax which often receives a high appraisal value due to location.But then again, they do want to control the food supply now don’t they?

  • RightHandMan
    RightHandMan December 21, 2010 at 8:05 AM

    @Steve, You’re correct, they do this on a lot of issues. Divide and conquer.
    @Colin, Great numbers…it’s just a stupid system. How about a fair tax?
    @LD, He’s annoying. He can’t even stay in the frame of the freaking camera. Also, anyone else feel that it is highly ironic that he’s telling us about what our heirs deserve…a man who can have no natural heirs?
    @Doomed, The problem with their philosophy (besides it beign wrong) is that the rich won’t deal with it. Eventually they’ll either get around the taxes or leave the country.
    @Bunkerville, Absolutely correct! I wish I had brought up the family farms in my post because it is such a devistating image of what the left is doing to families via the estate tax.

  • Jim Gourdie December 21, 2010 at 4:32 PM

    I read somewhere in the last few weeks that the liberals were insisting that the estate tax had to be raised. Their example was when Sam Walton dies, the government stands to lose $30 billion. They think it is their money. Franks is right when he says the heirs didn’t earn it. But Sam did earn it and it is all after tax money. Sam should have the right to decide who gets his money not the government

  • Matt December 21, 2010 at 7:36 PM

    Great article and comments. Doomed nailed it with the desired objective of current economic policies. It’s really a philosophy that Frank exemplified so well. They really do think that all wealth belongs to them, and they are very generous in allowing us to have any of it.

  • Maggie@MaggiesNotebook December 21, 2010 at 11:54 PM

    RHM and John, congratulations on this beautiful new site. It’s great to see you back writing.

    We have been quiet about taxes and congressional attitudes for decades. I don’t know if we can turn it around at this late date with 47% of Americans paying no taxes at all. This should be one of the first fires the Republicans begin to douse and we need the ground work for a Fair or Flat tax (I prefer the Fair Tax) and make it almost impossible to be overridden once it is done.

    Your explanation of the immorality of being placed within a certain group is spot-on. We certainly are not taxed equally, and the Left has many believing we should not be.

    Great start on your new venture.
    Maggie@MaggiesNotebook recently posted..Votes Have Consequences- FCC Will Neuter the NetMy Profile

  • theCL December 22, 2010 at 1:19 PM

    Amen! Before we discuss the budget and what we will or won’t spend, we first need to have a conversation about the morality of taking a person’s earnings. If it’s theft when your neighbor does it, it is theft when the government does it too. “Government” does not mean we excuse morality.
    theCL recently posted..The War on MoralityMy Profile