Monday, July 06, 2009
|
|
The MSM's Tax Naifs
|
|
Posted by:
Carol Platt Liebau at
12:20 PM
|
The LA Times' Chris Erskine wrote a column about a tea party in suburban Los Angeles over the weekend. Along with all the condescendingly folksy "color commentary" about the "characters" attending, Erskine managed perfectly to crystallize the naive (or ignorant) MSM attitude to tax increases:
In such a climate, it strikes me as . . . well, almost un-American to be griping so vehemently about helping those less fortunate. Were this a war, we'd all dig a little deeper to buy guns and battleships.
Well, we're in a war, and we've got to dig a little deeper to provide jobs and economic band-aids. We will. When pressed, we are a pretty amazing country.
Erskine makes a number of assumptions that are troublingly uninformed.
First, America is the most generous country on earth, as our record of private charitable giving demonstrates. What's more, the type of people protesting at the tea parties are more likely to be donating than Erskine's liberal buddies, who apparently consider taxes something akin to a holy offering.
None of the tax protests have anything to do with opposition to "helping those less fortunate" (although, in fairness, when did it become "un-American" to object to having the fruits of one's own labor coercively taken by the state, simply because other people were deemed to "need" what you had earned?). Rather, the tea parties have arisen because of the government's wasteful spending. Perhaps Erskine should look into the panoply of benefits that allow our state representatives (and state workers) to live in a way that those in the private sector cannot -- and their air of entitlement to them.
Second, in a "war," people are providing for the common defense. Here in California, the productive are taxed without mercy -- and yet the schools underperform, the hospitals and prisons are overcrowded, and the roads are a mess. Unless you are part of a union, a politician, or in need of public assistance, there isn't a whole lot to like about the way the state is run. You pay, and pay, and pay -- and see nothing for it. In a war, people in the rest of the country would object -- and rightly so -- for being taxed to eternity to defend, say, only the northeast.
Third, as even those like Erskine should be learning from the Obama "stimulus" debacle, jobs are not "provided" by taxing the people who create them. Jobs are created when the job-creators are freed from the nightmarish over-regulation and confiscatory taxation that has made California a terrible climate for "business" -- yes, the same "business" that creates jobs.
Finally, Erskine assumes that everyone who is protesting over-taxation is simply doing so to be selfishly "un-American." Has it ever occurred to him that for some, a tax bill that forever spirals upward can spell economic disaster? How is it someone putting out a hand for public assistance should be the object of respect and compassion, while those who are simply trying to maintain their economic equilibrium and independence should be condemned as unpatriotic?
|
|
|
Which group wants me to dig deeper? The conservatives or the party of the tax cheats? They just want others to pay the taxes that they will cheat on. |
|
if DC gets by on $2500 a student, go for it. I don't care...my kids are in college.
I'm not dictating to anyone. If you want 'choice', then you pay for it. I choose to live in a particular neighborhood, my cost, my choice. |
|
"Well, I'll agree to a voucher program so long as the school meets public school requirements, which means no religious schools or home schools would get the money."
In other words, a voucher system will have to be politically correct not necessarily excellent educational-wise as leftians measure "requirements." |
|
Merkel said this last week, Germany is cutting taxes because it needs the growth.
Now isn't that a novel idea... |
|
Well since the school in DC meets your agreed requirements for school vouchers it's good to have you on board. What you have to do now is contact your represenatives in the good state of CA who voted it out and demand the program be reinstated. Good luck.
|
|
Fox News Channel interviewed the parents of the students that were given vouchers to private schools during the Bush administration.
The students are poor and low income African-Americans and President Obama is well aware of that fact.
The Obama children have never attended public school so when the Obama's said "we're looking into the Washington, D.C. public school system" is was just more campaign rhetoric.
The children of Washington politicans attend the same "private" school, so if the feds are offering "private option" insurance, parents are more than will to accept "private option" education too. |
|
|
seen nuttin yet, Ha The tea party is alive and well and going stong in the near future. This holidays small crowds were just a reminder of what patriotic Americans are all about. Most of us were busy with festivities but we're never quitting. The fiscally irresponsible Congress etc., will have to deal with true T'P Americans! |
|
how much would they be? Do you think that most good private schools could get by on $2500 per student per year? Of course not, only the evangelical ones.
Well, I'll agree to a voucher program so long as the school meets public school requirements, which means no religious schools or home schools would get the money. And most decent private schools (in LA at least) cost $20K and up a year for preK. |
|
"The president has no say whatsoever about vouchers in the District of Columbia. Doesn't matter if it's Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or Obama. Your statement is 100% false."
D.C.'s voucher plan was guided through Congress in 2004 by President George W. Bush; it passed the House of Representatives by a single vote. It was part of a "three sector" approach promoted by the Bush administration to support equally public schools, charter schools, and vouchers, in D. C.
The $410 billion dollar omnibus spending bill for fiscal year 2009 included a provision that would have let funding for the city’s school voucher program expire at the end of the 2010 school year.
A Republican-sponsored amendment to the spending bill would have extended the voucher program beyond the 2009-2010 school year but it was rejected in the Senate by a vote of 50-39.
In the meantime, someone got to Obama and disclosed how he could make some not so transparent political points. Consequently, Obama’s fiscal 2010 budget proposal contained $12.2 million to continue private school vouchers for the 2010-2011 school year which would cover students currently enrolled in the program.
The rejected Republican amendment would have accomplished the same thing.
"Why can't I just eat my waffle?"
~Obama after being asked a foreign policy question by a reporter while visiting a diner in Pennsylvania. |
|
One phone call from Odumbo to Pelosi and another to Reid and the voucher program for the kids is still in place.
But I guess that would have ticked off the teacher's union and God forbid that happens.
Teachers union-1
Poor kids-0 |
|
OK, it was the dems in congress who killed the vouchers for the kids in DC.
Feel better now? |
|
Do you just make this stuff up, or are you copying it from some mouth-breather's blog?
"Sasha and Malia go to Sidwell Friends', but Obama decided to kill vouchers for parents in DC who wanted to send their kids to private or charter schools."
The president has no say whatsoever about vouchers in the District of Columbia. Doesn't matter if it's Reagan, Bush, Clinton, or Obama. Your statement is 100% false. |
|
Sasha and Malia go to Sidwell Friends', but Obama decided to kill vouchers for parents in DC who wanted to send their kids to private or charter schools. No, regular folks' kids will just have to put up with the terrible schools in DC because THEY are not special enough. The teacher's unions are more important than the children's needs are.
Obama makes millions and gave less than $500 in charitible donations. I make WAY under $100K/yr and gave ~$2500.
Obama is an elitist, socialist SNOB. |
|
The President is a leader who does not set the right example! If we followed his past contributions record, the needy etc., would be standing in soup lines! They want us to sacrifice but not them. The proof is in the pudding, just check out their tax donations over the years! Even with Obamas millions, from his book sales mostly, he was far from being generous. What can you expect from the Obamas, who won't even help his poor brother? They spend our hard earned money on their lavish entertainment. The message the undeserving Prez., sends is 'do as I say do, not as I do'!
Ex Democrat |
|
|
of the msm dunces today, uninformed and, sadly, poorly educated. Obviously, he cannot distinguish the difference between war and over-taxation, again a sparkling reminder of why education in CA is 49th! Apparently, he has swallowed hook-line-and-sinker the community organizer's fantasy regarding the task of govt. and the task of private enterprise. He has proven, once again, the media has become nothing more than a shill, they are no longer relevant. |
|
|
|