Workers, Deadbeat Citizens & the Income Tax

This paragraph below applies to those who work. For those who don't, maybe you should work for "free" for the government that is giving you so much support in return. You don't have to work anymore that what you receive in benefits. So, don't be a deadbeat citizen.

Income tax is a transfer of income from one person or entity to another person or entity. In other words, part of your pay does not belong to you. You have in effect worked for free for the beneficiaries of taxes you pay. However, if you benefit from the quality of life in general in the United States, the military protection and so on, then only a portion of every dollar you earn, it is earned for someone else or some cause involuntarily.

The percentage of tax you pay indicates how much the governments thinks it costs to provide a benefit to each individual, whether or not legally present in the United States. It also thinks that the richer you are, the more tax you would have to pay. On the one hand, it is unfair because a rich person benefits the same from the same defense plan as a poor person and therefore the rich ought to be taxed the same as the poor. On the other hand, the richer the person the more he/she has to lose without governmental protection, then a graduated tax rate is fair.

The TEA (Taxed Enough Already) party thinks that what the federal government provides each citizen is just about right at these present tax rates. For individuals in 2010, they are here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040tt.pdf Corporations have a different tax structure and it can be very complicated. President Obama and a majority of democrats thinks that nobody is paying enough and ought to pay for more than what one receive in government benefits, in order that those incapable of supporting themselves can receive help from you by law.

Therein lies the core question: Is the United States a country for the survival of the fittest or a compassionate one that comes to the aid of those in need? I think the answer is somewhere along the spectrum between these extremes.

The balance is between the United States affording to accumulate a bigger and bigger debt in order to be a compassionate nation at the expense of the capable who are shouldering a heavier and heavier burden that they may one day be incapable of shouldering, and the United States saying to the needy that you, too, need to do sacrifice for the common good, for the future youth of our country and for those seniors and needy poor who will come after you.

As it stands now, unless the economy grows in leaps and bounds and generate enough tax revenue to pay down the deficit, the deficit will continue to grow, and grow out of control, leading to the certain suffering of all economically. The race therefore is between economic expansion and the expanding budget deficit. With the world economic disaster still looming, one that began under GW Bush's careless presidency, one that not only fed the unbridled greed on Wall Street, but also started a gratuitous war in Iraq against all wisdom, the prospect of an economic boom capable of eradicating or shrinking the United States deficit anytime soon is unlikely, even though there are signs that there is an economic recovery underway.

Short of a miracle, therefore, cuts must take place without raising taxes that could slow a recovering economy and result in extending the current recession indefinitely.