Patriotism That Matters
by KTKOctober 8th, 2008
Holy crap! Who’s been putting what in Tom Friedman’s Wheaties?
After years of self-congratulatory “big idea” drivel and smug sooth-saying, I’ve noticed that Friedman seems to have been returning to real, thought-out, argumentative analysis lately. And today he apparently woke up with whatever strange, crippling monkey he’s been carrying around all this time finally off his back and decided to take a full cut at the ol’ pill, one time. He starts by treating Sarah Palin like a big fat teeball, but that’s just a warm-up swing. By the time he gets around to how taxes “buy civilization”, and whose interests, exactly, are served by the GOP continually stoking our oil addiction, he’s fucking Babe Ruth.
Criticizing Sarah Palin is truly shooting fish in a barrel. But . . . there was one thing she said in the debate with Joe Biden that really sticks in my craw. It was when she turned to Biden and declared: “You said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America, which is where Todd and I have been all of our lives, that’s not patriotic.”
I only wish she had been asked: “Governor Palin, if paying taxes is not considered patriotic in your neighborhood, who is going to pay for the body armor that will protect your son in Iraq? Who is going to pay for the bailout you endorsed? If it isn’t from tax revenues, there are only two ways to pay for those big projects — printing more money or borrowing more money. Do you think borrowing money from China is more patriotic than raising it in taxes from Americans?” That is not putting America first. That is selling America first.
Sorry, I grew up in a very middle-class family in a very middle-class suburb of Minneapolis, and my parents taught me that paying taxes, while certainly no fun, was how we paid for the police and the Army, our public universities and local schools, scientific research and Medicare for the elderly. No one said it better than Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: “I like paying taxes. With them I buy civilization.” . . .
[P]utting the country in the position where a total novice like Sarah Palin could be asked to steer us through possibly the most serious economic crisis of our lives is flat out reckless. It is the opposite of conservative.
And please don’t tell me she will hire smart advisers. What happens when her two smartest advisers disagree?
And please also don’t tell me she is an “energy expert.” She is an energy expert exactly the same way the king of Saudi Arabia is an energy expert — by accident of residence. . . .
At least the king of Saudi Arabia, in advocating “drill baby drill,” is serving his country’s interests — by prolonging America’s dependence on oil. My problem with Palin is that she is also serving his country’s interests — by prolonging America’s dependence on oil.
Damn. I haven’t heard such a clear or uncompromising statement about what taxes are for since I can remember. And selling America to China and Saudi Arabia? About time someone said it.
He hit that one out of the park. Hope somebody notices.
Categories: Culture, Economics, Energy, Foreign Policy, General, News & Current Events, Politics, Taxes |
Wow. Just, wow. I’ve been saying for a while that we need to re-draw the connection between taxes and the things taxes pay for, and Friedman does an excellent job here.
It is hard “to re-draw the connection between taxes and the things taxes pay for” when the things taxes pay for include ever-growing entitlement programs, simply redistributing income from one group in this country to another based upon the political will of the majority party in power.
When taxes are used to pay for things which benefit all citizens, such as for the defense of the nation or an interstate highway program or a DOE to regulate nuclear power plants, citizens can actually see that they are getting something for their money.
When I am told to pay higher taxes so that the government can give my money to another person (for just about any reason) that is simply theft and socialistic redistrition of wealth. And if that is the way the government wants to work, my goal will be to get on that gravy train of largess paid out of my fellow citizens’ pockets, not to produce more (since I won’t be allowed to keep it).
Mikee:
So you’re telling me that a healthy, well-educated populace doesn’t benefit all citizens? That a stable economy doesn’t benefit all citizens?
The taxation-is-theft canard is old and tired, and it’s about time we put it out of its (and our) misery.
And for the record, about the only major program where we actually give people money directly is social security, which you’ll note is overwhelmingly popular with Americans, irrespective of their political affiliation.
What gravy train are you talking about, Mikee? I can only think of two possibilities.
A)The redistribution of tax dollars by politicians to their corporate cronies via earmarking and overinflated, virtual no-bid, contracts. So, if you wanna hop on that train, all you gotta do is hop in your Dolorean and play matchmaker between your mom and somebody inside the circle. Or, you could dig in your couch cushions until you find enough change to purchase Lockheed Martin. Doesn’t look like that train is boarding, fella.
B)Welfare and other safety net type programs. However, I’m not sure where the largess is there. If you want to quit your job to hop on the welfare line, by all means go ahead. 99.9% of the current roll would be happy to switch places.
Finally, the cost of a poorly educated, unhealthy, and unstable population is much greater than the cost of subsidizing programs to prevent those outcomes.