Re: 2012 Elections in 3-D!
I guess this could fit here. A
funny yet actually somewhat insightful article about wealth in the US and some common things people with money might say and how it is perceived by everyone else.
Very interesting article, thanks for posting. I enjoyed much of it.
Interesting though that the author has a blind spot as well. Far fewer people argue that "the rich" "should" pay their "fair share" than there are people who argue that "the rich" "MUST be FORCED" to pay their "fair share" through government action. I agree with the former while I find that the latter makes me very uncomfortable.
Private charity by the wealthy has been with us a long time, see Andrew Carnegie as probably the best example, though today we also have Warren "don't tax my wealth pal!" Buffett giving most of his fortune to charity so that he pays little estate tax.
Mitt blew a big chance when he released his income tax returns. He donated more money to charity than he paid in income tax. That was a golden opportunity for him to hold up the 1040 in one hand and Schedule A in the other and say: here (shake 1040) I paid half my fair share to the government, here (shake Schedule A) I paid half my fair share to various charities. Here (wave 1040), after running through payroll and benefits and bureaucracy, a fraction of the money I paid was made available to the people who actually need it, although much of that in the form of programs that seem to be ineffective at accomplishing their professed aims, while here (wave Schedule A), after running through a much smaller payroll and a much leaner bureaucracy, more of the money I gave went directly to help the people who needed help the most, in a way that recognized the reciprocal relationships we have: it is not only about our giving, it also is about how they receive it, is it only a hand out, or is it both a hand out and a hand up as well?
Anyway, when the government starts forcing people to pay their "fair share" then the line always must keep coming down. Human wants are unlimited while human resources are limited and sometimes people need to work both ends of the spectrum for society to prosper. Ravaging only the top while failing also to improve responsible utilization at the bottom is a recipe for long-term disaster.
