Kumozarusan's Playlist

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Can you really save the free market by injecting socialism into it?

My responses to the BYU Political Review article on President Obama, his administration, and the Democratic Party's policies concerning the economy, capitalism, and saving the free market.


http://www.byupoliticalreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=130:are-democrats-against-capitaliism&catid=34:articles


Gary, 
Thanks for your views on the current admin.'s tax & economic policies. However, I’m concerned with your line of thinking. What many Americans seem to be forgetting is that we are a nation of laws & not of men or the will of men; all individuals are equal before the law, regardless of race, gender, disability, financial situation, etc. This means that what we all must do is consider the law 1st before we consider what we think should be done. We are forgetting that just because something should be done it doesn't mean it can be done legally. All Americans & the gov. are bound to act within the boundaries & dictates of the federal Constitution. What looks to be happening ever so increasingly is that Americans & the gov. are bending the Constitution to agree with the laws made by Congress & desires of the gov. & the American people. But, in a constitutional, democratic republic, this can't be. Rather, it is the laws of Congress and desires of the gov. & Americans that must be bent to agree with the demands of the constitution. It frightens me when you say “the best option in such economic conundrums" is for the gov. to intervene, and that "complete market freedom is not much good if this freedom results in conditions that are deleterious to the economy."

Free economies rise and fall of their own accord, due to supply, demand, and the spending habits and situations of the people. What economies loose during a down period, they are able to make up in the next rise, without being barred by legal limitations. But when a country sacrifices a few freedoms to the gov. during economic hard times, those freedoms are extremely difficult/impossible to get back during the economic up times, when things are good & the people want those freedoms back. Thus, when people submit freedoms for economic security during the bad times, they are allowing the gov. to set legal limitations that bar them from taking those freedoms back during good times. We mustn't be willing to sacrifice freedoms for materialism & economic security, because these are only temporary, & will run out when the supply of such security is exhausted. We see this now in Europe where violent riots are rampant. While economic security is temporary, ending with the present generation, freedoms and rights are eternal; they are inherent in each generation. We must stop selfishly worrying only about ourselves & the now, & worry about what we are doing for our posterity & the future.


We must not forget that we have a natural right to ACQUISITION of materialism & financial security, & not a natural or civil right to PROVISION of materialism & economic security. I can't help but agree with what the Bible Dictionary says about the War in Heaven; "the issues involved such things as agency, how to gain salvation, and who should be the Redeemer. It was evident that if given agency, some persons would fall short of complete salvation; Lucifer and his followers wanted salvation to come automatically to all who passed through mortality, without regard to individual preference, agency, or voluntary dedication." We have a natural right to ACQUISITION of salvation thru our agency, but not to PROVISION of salvation.

Concerning the estate tax, it merely establishes injustice, unfairness, & inequality before the law. Taxation is legislation, & when 1 group of people is seen as of more or less worth before the law, where the law applies to only 1 portion of the population but not the other(s), this establishes inequality before the law. This is exactly what the estate tax does. It taxes or binds only 1 tiny portion of the population, while the rest of the nation gets a free ride and isn't bound by the tax law. It establishes 1 portion of the country, the poor and middling people, as of more worth before the law and in society than those who are considered rich. This CANNOT happen in America, the land of liberty and equality. The progressive income tax does the same thing; it establishes inequality before the law. 

The estate tax also cannot happen legally because it establishes quadruple taxation & hence violates our right to acquisition, accumulation, & possession of private property. It's taxed once upon purchase, twice with yearly property taxes, & thrice with the income tax. Remember, an estate is not only landed property; it includes money & personal possessions too, & is the value of the entire estate to be passed on as an inheritance. Thus, it will establish a 4th tax on private property that has already been taxed 3 times. When the gov. can tax a private possession as many times as it wishes, for whatever reason it wishes, & at any rate it wishes, can it really be said we even own the possessions any more? This doesn't happen with other private possessions that have already been taxed, like a car or a computer, so why should it happen with an estate? It is nothing but mere coveting and theft via taxation.


  

No comments:

Post a Comment