Taxation

Social Class Journal 

     The best government, in my view, is the one which taxes least. Or at least imposes the fewest taxes possible while still performing the constitutional duties. Ever since the early days of our republic, the size of the federal government and the scope of the issues in which it meddles has increased dramatically. While I believe that the federal government has a prominent role to play in protecting the people’s rights, I believe that the federal government has a smaller role to play in the economic issues facing individuals. The new deal dramatically increased the powers of the federal government, a power grab from which the country has not recovered. Among these economic issues are the redistribution of income and wealth. If the government was to pay for just national defense and other basic functions such as courts, emergency relief funding, and other basic entities which enforce simple regulations, the spending required would be much less than what is spent today. I believe that where we go wrong when this country tries to redistribute wealth and income, we must impose heavy tax burdens on our citizens, and that is unacceptable. The spending required for redistributing wealth and income is financed by excessive taxation and deficit spending, both of which hurt the economy and the country as a whole. I believe that the government must stop the redistribution of wealth, and therefore, the levels of taxation required to sustain the government’s essential and proper functions will be significantly less than the levels of taxation today. It is with this in mind that I will address the fourth topic in the assignment, the issue of taxation as a whole. 

     Contrary to the belief held by the left and the president that the “wealthiest Americans should pay their fair share”, the tax system in this country punishes success and severely places the tax burden on the rich. According to the CBO, in 2008 the top 1% of earners payed 38.02% of all federal income taxes, while the top 10% payed 69.94%. Contrast that with 1980, when the numbers were 19.05% and 49.28%, respectively. I don’t know of anybody who said that the tax burden then was unfairly burdening the poor then, but all of a sudden, the top earners aren’t paying their fair share? This is surely political rhetoric. Our tax system is already very progressive, and in my view, it does not need to be more so. I feel that if the poor do not pay anything (the CBO reports that the bottom 47% of earners payed negative net federal income taxes in 2009), they will not appreciate their welfare checks and they will feel entitled to the checks, instead of realizing that the money they receive in assistance was actually earned and not pulled out of uncle Sam’s knickers. I believe that the math should work out so that if any income bracket earns X% of the income, they should pay X% of the taxes. A welfare state cannot survive if the levels of taxation are lowered, and it is fully my intent to eliminate the welfare state. Although the Center for American Progress states, correctly, that growth during the 1950s was more than 4% annually and taxes were high, the real reason is not high taxes on the wealthy, as implied. The real reason for economic growth during the post war era was the growth in manufacturing due to the increasingly technologically advanced world and the move to the suburbs. The reason that the United States benefitted the most from this was because Europe and the rest of the world was in ruins after the War, and the United States had all of the necessary infrastructure in place to become the primary manufacturer of goods for the rest of the world. The CAP is also misleading, because the actual rate of taxation for the top 400 earners in 1955 was 51.2%, not the 92% they would have preferred. Also, according to taxpolicycenter.org and the OMB, the total revenue for the federal government as a percent of GDP in 1955 was 16.5%, while in 2006 it was 18.2%, indicating that the federal government took less away from the economy in the 50’s than today. Combine that extra private capital with no competition from the outside world and with today’s ease of completing transactions through the internet, and most economists would agree that that would result in very high growth. 

     In my assessment, fair means that each individual pays the same percentage of his adjusted gross income in income taxes to the federal government. Of course, this differs from the definition of fair by Liberals, who have somehow determined that fair means the higher earners must pay almost the entirety of government revenues, while the lower income earners must become dependent on them. According to the Cato institute, income inequality has not increased due to the changes in the rules regulating what is reported as income. Therefore, the solutions and changes for our income tax structure should not try to make everybody earn the same amount, but they should allow for everybody to pay their real fair share (not the left wing fair share). The income tax should be levied in a manner as simple as possible:

• Elimination of all existing personal income tax structure
• Elimination of the AMT
• Elimination of the capital gains tax and estate tax
• 17.5% income tax after healthcare expenses (including health savings accounts), dependent deductions, mortgage interest deductions, retirement account deductions, education saving accounts, and basic food deductions
• A “Buffett rule” allowing optional donations to deficit reduction. 

     The solution is not to make more loopholes that divert energy and time from productive uses into finding innovative ways to reduce taxes, but to simplify the system and make it permanent so that everybody wins. In this system, the rich will still pay more as a percentage of their income. However, in my view, this system follows the 14th amendment, something that the progressive tax system does not. It also does not allow for the government to collect too much revenue and then distribute it among the people. This prevents too much dependance on the government for welfare, while allowing those truly down on their luck to have a social safety net. This is accomplished by eliminating the government subsidies of middle income workers, something that the Affordable Care Act expands by allowing a family making nearly $45,000 eligible for medicaid. 

     In summation, the government has grown too big, and is financed by too much taxation and deficit spending. If spending were lowered, the tax system simplified and rates reduced, and the mentality that government is the only solution to economic woes eliminated, the country would be much better off. 

Journal #7: Immigration

     Although Nativists are incorrect in their assertions that all immigrants are not assimilating and that they are endangering the American way of life, these same assertions are true for a portion of the immigrant population. Immigrants from Latin America are coming to the United States in record numbers, and it is their refusal to conform to our language and culture that is causing the problem that the Nativists are talking about today. A large amount of today's immigrants are coming from Asia, with the majority from India and China. These immigrants are typically well educated and skilled, and they are prepared to contribute to the diverse and skilled economy of the United States. I have spent a considerable amount of time around such people, and I have noticed that the Chinese and Indians, along with the various other cultures from Eastern Asia, have an extremely hard work ethic and they value this hard work that brings success, and they place great importance on leaving behind a better future for the next generation. These traits, although possessed by recent non-white immigrants, are uniquely American. They learn our language, and although they speak their native tongue at home with the other immigrants and first generation Americans, they do not ask for special privileges such as their own languages on driver's exams or food labels. 

     Nativists are correct when it comes to the recent influx of Hispanic immigrants. They are coming in record numbers, and according to the United States Census Bureau, Hispanics are expected to comprise over 30% of the population by 2030. The trend of huge amounts of Hispanics from third world countries combined with political correctness is creating a dangerous trend. Instead of being immersed in an English speaking classroom, many classrooms are adapting to hispanics and are allowing special classes in Spanish in American schools, payed for by American taxpayers. (The story has been told, time and time again, of the ancestor who has come to America with their coat, 10 dollars, and no English. In each and every case they are instantly immersed into the language, and come out just fine. Never is this story of the ancestor who came over and the signs were in their native tongue.) All of my ancestors came to this country not knowing a word of English, and they were all able to become fluent in no time, and of the 6 immigrants that came to this country (my maternal grandparents and my paternal great-grandparents), they couldn't combine their English vocabulary to form a sentence. Anyways, the Spanish speakers now have official government forms in their language, road signs in Spanish, and nearly all products have Spanish visible. This creates an image in the young Latino's mind that they are a protected class and should be allowed to operate separately from the American mainstream. Also, amnesty for illegal immigrants is popular with a sizable minority of politicians (whether they directly admit it or not), and this further reinforces the sentiments that because Mexico and its southern amigos are burdened economically and socially, its denizens have the right to come to America without any restrictions. This narrative fits perfectly into the hands of the far left who use the strategy of "divide and conquer" in which new classes of oppressed people are created, and then legislation to "protect" them is enacted in the hopes of getting the vote of the "victims". (There is too close a connection between elements of the Democratic Party and La Raza).

     In turn, Hispanics who are truly coming to this country and trying to adopt our values are overlooked, since Hispanics today are given so many opportunities to remain insulated from the rest of society. (My grandmother learned basic English by watching our soap operas, while today's Hispanics can be insulated from learning our customs by watching telenovelas on Telemundo ). To put an end to the phenomenon of Hispanic non-assimilation, the "protections" that are in place today such as offering government services in Spanish and allowing students with limited proficiency in English to not participate in normal classes must come to an end. 

     Also, the culture of Mexico and other Latin countries does not value traditional families and a hard work ethic as much as the cultures which are experiencing a large influx of immigrants. The percent of Hispanic households headed by single parents is 40%, compared to 16% for Asians. Also the incarceration rates of Hispanics is 2.43 times as much when compared to whites. These cultural differences contribute to the sense that Hispanics are not fully assimilated and are never going to be.

      Immigration, as a whole, has immensely helped America, and this country would not be where it is today if it were not for immigrants. Immigration, along with our constitution and our political culture of being a nation of "laws, not men", make up why this country is the greatest on Earth. Immigrants coming to America are always seeking a better life for themselves, and therefore America receives the best and the brightest from around the world. In turn, our country has an entrepreneurial spirit that makes living in America much better than anywhere else because it is only here where a poor European worker can move, send his kids to school, and they can start a business and invent new ideas that make life better here. In each and every age since the founding of the original colonies, America has been at the forefront of whatever technology was state of the art at the time. In the early days, we were known for our exceptional agriculture, as there were infinite possibilities for crops to be grown and land to be plowed. Our crops were in demand all over the world, and farmers poured into this country from Europe where they had been crammed into small, unproductive farms which they did not own. This country provided an escape. As industry began to replace agriculture as the forefront of technology, the United States led the way, and immigrants were an important part of that. Immigrants came to America to work in our factories and also to invent new ideas free from the political pressures of Europe. Now, manufacturing has been replaced by high-technology as the driving force behind our economy, and the United States is in the lead. Who invented Facebook, who has the world's biggest stock exchange, who has the largest economy? America. While China might be gaining steam and cranking out many plug-n-chug engineers, the best from that country are still coming to the United States to work, average people in China still enjoy few of the rights and freedoms present here, per capita income there is miniscule, and they are just feeding off of American ingenuity by making the products America invents, creating very little of their own along the way. Along its entire journey as a nation, America has attracted the best and most willing immigrants to assists in making the nation great, and without the huge amounts of immigration, America would be just another country, not exceptional as it is today. America is a melting pot of cultures. It absorbs the good and desirable traits of cultures, while also, importantly, melting the bad and undesirable traits out of immigrant cultures. This blending of cultures and the removal of poor traits makes for an environment containing a fraction of the animosity present between cultures in Europe, which emphasizes diversity and pays the price for it.  

     As a whole, immigration has greatly served this country, and will be a vital component in America's success in the future.