...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
Missouri wrote:
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of D... (
show quote)
This is the kind of history Texas is erasing from school text books. I really think they will need to edit the bible also if they want to be continued to be viewed as Christians.
Missouri wrote:
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of D... (
show quote)
==================================================================
Your ranting is interesting, but just what do you want anyone to do with it? I agree that taxation of the citizens it serves is a form of s***ery, but it is also a form of finance for the elements of society that we as individuals cannot afford to fund. The problem I believe is that figuring out what a fair share of the tax burden is to be would provide some lessening of the animosity we all face because we have no, or very little control over how the money they gouge us for is spent.
The fair tax program was proposed, but the highly paid representatives we send to Congress, refuse to whittle their pay down to give us all a break. Instead, they naturally increase their own salary and perc's , wasting our money on themselves and their high living.
In addition they spend money foolishly on foreign skullduggery instead of taking care of our own problems
If only imports are taxed to support the government, it would seem like a boon for the citizens, but of course the cost of the imported products would get higher, and or, the services we want the government to do, (Wh**ever that is) will have less concern. We can support ourselves in this country if we stop spending money in other countries. Do you believe we should shut the imports down and just handle our own tasks? Why not, it might be good for a couple of years.
Missouri wrote:
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of D... (
show quote)
Very nicely done. All good points.
Everyone Can Stop Reading (If You Hadn't Already)
When You Get To KOS
karpenter wrote:
Everyone Can Stop Reading (If You Hadn't Already)
When You Get To KOS
Skating on thin ice, the lot of them.
Missouri wrote:
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of D... (
show quote)
**************
Missouri. Thank you for your acute dissertation. I shall copy it into my permanent file with your permission. ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
larry wrote:
==================================================================
Your ranting is interesting, but just what do you want anyone to do with it? I agree that taxation of the citizens it serves is a form of s***ery, but it is also a form of finance for the elements of society that we as individuals cannot afford to fund. The problem I believe is that figuring out what a fair share of the tax burden is to be would provide some lessening of the animosity we all face because we have no, or very little control over how the money they gouge us for is spent.
The fair tax program was proposed, but the highly paid representatives we send to Congress, refuse to whittle their pay down to give us all a break. Instead, they naturally increase their own salary and perc's , wasting our money on themselves and their high living.
In addition they spend money foolishly on foreign skullduggery instead of taking care of our own problems
If only imports are taxed to support the government, it would seem like a boon for the citizens, but of course the cost of the imported products would get higher, and or, the services we want the government to do, (Wh**ever that is) will have less concern. We can support ourselves in this country if we stop spending money in other countries. Do you believe we should shut the imports down and just handle our own tasks? Why not, it might be good for a couple of years.
==================================================... (
show quote)
*****************
Globalization is unavoidable in today's world. It is no longer possible to be a totally individualistic and self-perpetrating nation. This country is and has been a major force primarily because of our size. We are quite blessed and, according to the Christian philosophy are required to help other nations.
As the world progresses, areas which did not even exist years ago have become necessities. Some of these necessities have been left by the wayside. Didn't you feel even greater p***e in this country when it was doing research and involved in space investigation. Didn't you feel greater when we were the first to land on the moon? The wealthy would like us to forget the government's part in these great advances. Do you really wish to assign these tasks to private industry?
Well all these advances take money and must be backed by our government. Patriots should feel glad in being able to take part in the advancement of our nation. I don't see that all the complaints about taxes, and avoidance of them, should be a deterrent. If each individual - and this includes corporations - has p***e in the U.S.A., he(they) should feel proud to be a part of keeping our nation at the top of the list. Off-shore banking to avoid taxes is shameful. Are patriots limited only to the poor and middle class?
It is obvious that this country needs a change in the philosophy of our "leaders(?)" Our country has been supplanted with a "me first" attitude.
Alicia wrote:
*****************
Globalization is unavoidable in today's world. It is no longer possible to be a totally individualistic and self-perpetrating nation. This country is and has been a major force primarily because of our size. We are quite blessed and, according to the Christian philosophy are required to help other nations.
As the world progresses, areas which did not even exist years ago have become necessities. Some of these necessities have been left by the wayside. Didn't you feel even greater p***e in this country when it was doing research and involved in space investigation. Didn't you feel greater when we were the first to land on the moon? The wealthy would like us to forget the government's part in these great advances. Do you really wish to assign these tasks to private industry?
Well all these advances take money and must be backed by our government. Patriots should feel glad in being able to take part in the advancement of our nation. I don't see that all the complaints about taxes, and avoidance of them, should be a deterrent. If each individual - and this includes corporations - has p***e in the U.S.A., he(they) should feel proud to be a part of keeping our nation at the top of the list. Off-shore banking to avoid taxes is shameful. Are patriots limited only to the poor and middle class?
It is obvious that this country needs a change in the philosophy of our "leaders(?)" Our country has been supplanted with a "me first" attitude.
***************** br Globalization is unavoidable ... (
show quote)
C*******m is alive and well in Russia and Red China. As much as you embrace that, and as much as c*******m is not and never will be a part of the USA, perhaps you should save up your pop bottles for a one way ticket
Alicia wrote:
*****************
Globalization is unavoidable in today's world. It is no longer possible to be a totally individualistic and self-perpetrating nation. This country is and has been a major force primarily because of our size. We are quite blessed and, according to the Christian philosophy are required to help other nations.
As the world progresses, areas which did not even exist years ago have become necessities. Some of these necessities have been left by the wayside. Didn't you feel even greater p***e in this country when it was doing research and involved in space investigation. Didn't you feel greater when we were the first to land on the moon? The wealthy would like us to forget the government's part in these great advances. Do you really wish to assign these tasks to private industry?
Well all these advances take money and must be backed by our government. Patriots should feel glad in being able to take part in the advancement of our nation. I don't see that all the complaints about taxes, and avoidance of them, should be a deterrent. If each individual - and this includes corporations - has p***e in the U.S.A., he(they) should feel proud to be a part of keeping our nation at the top of the list. Off-shore banking to avoid taxes is shameful. Are patriots limited only to the poor and middle class?
It is obvious that this country needs a change in the philosophy of our "leaders(?)" Our country has been supplanted with a "me first" attitude.
***************** br Globalization is unavoidable ... (
show quote)
To me, the very term of "patriot" causes pause. Our country has been supplanted by a g*******t first consciousness, that the right has been tirelessly working for for 3 decades. Get rid of the Unions. Promote h**e for the minimum wage. Privatize everything.
Missouri wrote:
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of Democratic morality. Of doing unto others as we would wish to be done unto. Of respecting the challenges others less fortunate face. Of fighting injustices toward women, toward children, toward our armed forces, toward our workers, toward the elderly, toward minorities. Toward V**ERS! Always, ALWAYS talk the morality of our politics, of our humanity. Its the biggest, best argument we can make, and it resonates - LOUDLY - beyond every boundary drawn on a map.
But here's something I find almost as frustrating as Republican deception: the unwillingness or inability of Democrats to smash Republican lies and myths with simple American history. One of Karl Rove's tenets is to attack your enemy's strength. And I think that is exactly what we should do. I think we should start calling Republicans' and conservatives' adoration of "market economics" what it actually is - the glorification of selfishness, the celebration of exactly some of the worst aspects of human nature. It is not Christian, nor is it American. And their hatred of a strong central government is neo-Confederate, plain and simple. Every statement a Rick Perry or a Newt Gingrich makes about secession and states rights should be flung in our foes' faces as treasonous and s*******s. I'm tired of playing nice with Republicans and conservatives who openly say stuff like bi-partisanship is like date rape - with Democrats as the victim.
Well, about two weeks ago, I happened to be in a restaurant in Yanceyville, NC, about 25 miles from my home. It's the seat of the next county over, typically southern conservative Caswell County, which I am proud to say my wife was on a local phone bank here in heavily Democratic Orange County that helped swing Caswell into the Democratic column in 2008. I picked up the most recent copy of the local paper, the Caswell Messenger, and my eye settled on a letter to the editor from some local conservative named Mr. R., raving that Obama's proposal for free college tuition was evil government redistribution, theft, blah, blah - the usual wrong-wing crap.
Now, ever since it became clear to me around 2009 or so, that President Obama was unwilling to buck Wall Street and fight for policies that would dramatically shift the balance between capital and labor, I have been reading a lot of American history in an attempt to find the answers to two questions: What is a republic supposed to be? And, what policies of political economy should a republic follow? In other words, is there a republican political economy? As distinguished from a plutocracy, or oligarchy, or monarchy.
So, I determined to take the LTE by Mr. R. and write my own letter to the editor refuting him point by point, including some of what I've learned the past six years. A couple days after I faxed and emailed my letter, I received an email from the editor asking me to shorten it quite a bit. It was originally just under 1,400 words, and I was able to trim it to about 900. I received another email, apologizing that they were looking for letters of about 500 words. So, I got it down to about 600 words, and emailed it to the editor, noting that I did not feel I could cut it any further.
Today, I needed to return some books to the Orange County library. I decided I would check if they carried the Caswell Messenger to see if my LTE had been printed. I had thought to post one of the shorter versions here on DailyKos, but decided they simply were not strong enough. So, I was delighted to find that the editor had made an exception, and printed my original, uncut letter in its entirety. So, forthwith, I present it to my fellow Kossacks, below the orange squiggle of intergalactic righteousness and t***h.
I was distressed to read Mr. R.s letter Free Education in the February 4, 2015 issue of The Caswell Messenger. It is one thing to espouse a philosophy of political economy that protects selfishness and the rich; it is altogether another thing, and entirely unacceptable, to claim that such a philosophy is moral, and was condoned by the Founders.
Mr. R.s assertions are based on the now widely accepted misconception that the money a person has is theirs. But did they print it? Did they make it? Did they put it into circulation? They may have earned their money, but it is really not theirs. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars. By classical Christian teaching, nothing a person has not their money, not their property, not their talents is theirs. All has been given them by the Lord, and their role as good stewards is to use that which they have been given to serve Him. And as Benjamin Franklin liked to say, the most acceptable service to God is doing good to men. Even Andrew Carnegies Gospel of Wealth recognized this concept.
Mr. R. attempts to frighten us with the dreaded heavy hand of government redistributing wealth. God only knows how many billions of dollars the selfish rich have given to think tanks like Heritage Foundation or Club for Growth to gin up the scary bogeyman of redistribution. But redistribution is exactly what governments have always done, through all of history. Recall the bread and circuses of ancient Rome. James Madison addressed this issue in his classic Federalist Paper No. 10, noting that political factions most often arise from economic interests. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, Madison wrote. Yes, REGULATION.
Redistribution of income dates from the very beginning of our republic, when the funding of the national government came almost entirely from import duties. In 1811, Thomas Jefferson wrote to Thaddeus Kosciusko, "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these alone the whole taxes of the General Government are levied.... the farmer will see his government supported, his children educated, and the face of his country made a paradise by the contributions of the rich alone, without his being called on to spend a cent from his earnings." This redistribution of wealth was entirely intentional: in a letter to James Madison dated October 28, 1785, Jefferson wrote, "Another means of silently lessening the ine******y of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise." It was understood at the time that large inequalities of wealth made the rich as dangerous to the republic as a standing army, because of the disproportionate political influence the rich could buy with their money.
Interestingly, the strongest opposition to the progressive taxation of using only import duties to support the federal government came from the s***e-holders of the South. And just as interestingly, it was not until the s***e-holders withdrew from the U.S. Congress with secession that our country was able to move forward economically with widespread development of the technologies developed before the Civil War. The telegraph had been invented and demonstrated in 1844 (with a direct appropriation of $40,000 to Samuel Morse), but it was not until Confederates were absent from Congress that legislation was passed that enabled a t***s-continental telegraph system. And, a t***s-continental railroad. And, land grants to create new public universities. And a Department of Agriculture to promote the use of science in agriculture (the 1920 discovery of photo-periodicity in plants by USDA scientists Harry A. Allard and W.W. Garner is just one of hundreds of examples; the introduction of winter wheats to the upper Plains by USDA agronomist Mark Carleton is another).
Just like the extreme property rights doctrines of the Confederacy corrupted many Christians a century and a half ago, today, the love of self and love of mammon have again corrupted many -- and have similarly r****ded the scientific and economic progress of the republic. The constant denunciation of redistribution by todays property rights extremists has made it politically impossible to raise taxes to levels needed to fulfill the Constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare. We cannot even afford to maintain our roads, bridges, waterways, and airports in good working order. Modern day Confederate economics have again crippled governments at all levels.
Finally, Mr. R. declares anyone desiring free education or free health care are thieves. But the real thieves are those selfish rich who fund anti-tax movements but who never would have amassed great wealth in another country, such as Somalia or Ethiopia, without the protections, promotions, incentives, and economic structure provided by a strong national government. The real thieves are the Wall Street traders and hedge fund managers who buy and sell stocks and bonds within split seconds, and then insist their capital gains be taxed at only 15 percent. What real wealth is being created by such high frequency trading? What benefit to the economy? The real thieves are the employers and managers who are unwilling to pay their employees the $20 to $30 an hour actually needed to raise a family, and save for the kids college education and retirement. How is such thievery different than Pharaoh forcing the Israelites to make bricks without straw (Exodus 5)?
As Benjamin Franklin wrote, in his 1783 essay Reflections on the Augmentation of Wages, Which Will Be Occasioned in Europe by the American Revolution, To desire to keep down the rate of wages
is to seek to render the citizens of a state miserable, in order that foreigners may purchase its productions at a cheaper rate; it is, at most, attempting to enrich a few merchants by impoverishing the body of the nation; it is taking the part of the stronger in that contest, already so unequal, between the man who can pay wages, and him who is under the necessity of receiving them; it is, in one word, to forget, that the object of every political society ought to be the happiness of the largest number.
Mr. R. is free to believe wh**ever historically ignorant economic theories he wants, even if they justify selfishness and a disregard for our fellow men and women, but he should not be allowed to pass off such theories as either Christian, or American.
...shine the biggest light on the superiority of D... (
show quote)
So far, everything you have presented not just in this post, but all of yours, shows you are neither Christian or American. You are however, a dyed in deep red, covered with sprinkles of PINK c*******t. Sorry to sink your boat, c*******m does not really work and as much as you seem to lack in knowledge, c*******m is NOT American....tah tah!
rumitoid wrote:
To me, the very term of "patriot" causes pause. Our country has been supplanted by a g*******t first consciousness, that the right has been tirelessly working for for 3 decades. Get rid of the Unions. Promote h**e for the minimum wage. Privatize everything.
If things in this world went you way, you'd have a heck of a time buying cheap booze, or any by the way. Perhaps you should re think seeing the USA become a c*******t nation. Further do not think for one moment the majority of Americans would welcome c*******m. If you ever wanted to see the largest civil war in the history of man kind, try tossing into the hat, that some one is going to try to enforce the USA to be a c*******tic Nation.
What you really fail to see is how many REAL Americans love the USA, have had family give their life for the freedom of NON c*******m, and that you could never count the number of real americans willing to die to keep the USA free.....
You need some help. Badly.
America Only wrote:
C*******m is alive and well in Russia and Red China. As much as you embrace that, and as much as c*******m is not and never will be a part of the USA, perhaps you should save up your pop bottles for a one way ticket
You are, as usual, very ill-informed. Capitalism, actually run-away capitalism, is alive and well in Russia and China. Any other ignorance to share?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
