Barack Obama, Democrat, donate, eliminate taxes, ethanol, free government money, give, government solutions, government spending, health insurance, income tax, iraq war, John McCain, korea, matthew lesko, money, public support, public works, Republican, vietnam
With the majority party conventions arriving the next two weeks, and with them endless promises of government “solutions” to America’s problems of security, energy, health care and economy, I’d like to begin by asking a simple question, “How important are those solutions to you, really?”
Barack Obama has said that his solution would provide health insurance for over 50 million uninsured in this country (many of whom are young people and illegal immigrants, but that’s besides the point) paid for by taxes. He continually touts this as caring for the little guy. Millions of people will probably vote for Obama in the upcoming election based primarily on this issue. To those people I ask the question, “If there were no taxes coerced from the citizenry to pay for the health insurance of those 50 million would you donate money to charities to provide health insurance for them?“
If the answer is “yes” then I have to ask “why can’t we do that now?” Instead of having the government forcibly steal from the citizenry to pay for these projects, why can’t private charities, which are much more efficient anyways, provide this service thru charitable donations?
If your answer is “no” then I can ascertain that you truly don’t care enough about those 50 million people to pay from your own pocket, but you’re ok with coercing that money from someone else. Basically, you believe it’s ok to steal, as long as the government does it and for someone who “needs” it. Or you simply believe, as I do, that each person is responsible for him or herself and nobody, especially the government, has a right to play Robin Hood on a grande (or any) scale.
So the question becomes, if all governmental spending questions were posed to the public in this way would taxation really be necessary? If all the social programs were really in the public’s “best interest” wouldn’t the public donate money, in their own best interest and of their own volition, toward that end? If the income tax was eliminated and your congressman came to your city and requested money for a subsidy to farmers in Idaho to grow corn for ethanol, would you donate money?
This is the fundamental question that all citizens and politicians should ask before supporting government programs that will commit even a dime of the tax payers hard earned money. Sure everyone will play fast and loose with the purse strings when it’s someone elses dime, but when that dime is yours, how willing are you to part with it for the government to waste it?
You could ask the same question about the decision to go to war. If taxes were eliminated, would all those in favor of the war in Iraq donate money to wage that war? Wouldn’t that limit the probability of interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations? How many of you would have donated money to fund the Vietnam War? Korea? Desert Storm? We would certainly get a better picture of the public’s support for any particular conflict and the true political asperations of any politician.
If you aren’t willing to put your money where your mouth is, why should the rest of us foot the bill?