By Guthrie “Guff” Worth
The country”s spending could be lowered significantly if the populace simply would stop being so emotional when it comes to letting some of the people simply die off. We don”t like to admit it, but if we, as a country, simply cut off food and medical resources from those who cannot afford subsistence-level living, the probability is that they would die off over a short period and would, as a result, save this country a lot of money for better uses.
Along the same line, if the almighty were to snap some fingers and (examples, not suggestions) all of the starving and under medicated children, all of the HIV/AIDS victims, all of the convicted felons, all of those with non-treatable, terminal afflictions, etc., etc. were to disappear, it is hard to say that the world would not be a better, more economically-able place. Think about it!
Surely, because of the way people think, this sort of thing will not be allowed to happen. Which flips the coin to the other side and if you”re not willing to let people starve, and they cannot feed themselves, you take on the obligation to feed (and such) them and you had better stop griping about the cost. Under the rules we play, there is no alternative to such spending.
Taxing is another area where we the people have to start recognizing our responsibilities. Since the last surpluses of ten or eleven years ago, we have managed to rack up astounding debts through the combination of unfunded war spending and a series of years where we had the unfortunate combination of under taxing and over spending. The country has been running at a substantial loss for a long time and need to counteract the economic disasters allowed to happen in 2007 and 2008 haven”t helped one bit. Being a deficit hawk is an honorable thing, but being able to accomplish it without additional tax income is virtually impossible.
I don”t know any billionaires, and too few millionaires, but I do have an idea of how much income is really needed to maintain a lifestyle. Forgetting about the “moral/emotional” aspect of the question, just think of the effect on your life if those with estates of $5,000,000 or more and incomes of more than $1,000,000 were to pay a tax rate of 100 percent of the amount over that $1,000,000. Take time to think. Probably wouldn”t affect the spending of the millionaires and would it really affect those of us who aren”t able to qualify? I think not! For reference, take a look at the tax rates at the end of WWII. You will find the top bracket at 91 percent. No one really liked it?or the idea of “dollar a year men”?but people knew it was needed to get the country back into shape. And it was effective!
I suspect that the people are going to have to make a “debt decision”. Are we willing to keep going with Ronald Reagan”s comment “Don”t worry about deficits,” and service our humongous debt forever, or are we going to try to reduce it and sacrifice to do it?
