Paul Caron alerts us to an article written by one Frank Pasquale, visiting professor at Yale Law School, in which it is argued that the House’s recently proposed 5.4% surcharge on the rich is insufficient:
[T] surcharge is not progressive enough, and this should be the main message of liberals commenting on the House bill. . . . The House’s top bracket for the surcharge is one million dollars.
But it is very hard for me to see why those who make that amount should be treated the same as those in the “Fortunate 400″–the 400 highest earning households which made, on average, more than $263 million apiece in 2006.
Collectivism
I have stated before my opposition to government schemes that involve the confiscation of the property of one class of Americans (the so called “privileged”) for the ostensible benefit of another class of Americans (the so called “unfortunate”).
For those of you who have been comatose or stranded on an island with a bloody volleyball for the last 60 years, collectivism has been tried many, many times before.
And it has never worked.
Anywhere!
Ever!
(See Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, Jonestown and Hale Bopp.)
Pretty Thoughts
So why do people like Professor Pasquale cling to communalism’s promise of Utopia like my dog clings to my ankle during a summer thunderstorm?
I guess you’d have to be a Viennese shrink to know the answer to that one.
Perhaps it makes them feel better about themselves by allowing them to nurse the comforting illusion that they, the chosen elite, are coming to the aid of their lessers.
Let’s pray it’s not nostalgia.
Confiscation of Wealth as Legitimate Government Policy
What’s most interesting about Pasquale’s article is that he appears to be only nominally concerned about where the additional revenue generated by surtaxing the rich will actually go.
(He says it will go to healthcare reform but doesn’t make a convincing argument that it will or that healthcare reform will actually benefit those whom it is intended to benefit)
He reserves his most passionate rhetoric for the taxing the mega-wealthy part of the equation.
For him, seizing money from those who have a lot of it is in and of itself a laudable reason for . . . um . . . seizing money from those who have a lot of it.
Let’s face it, you can eliminate the wealth gap tomorrow by taking the right amount of money from the “haves” and flushing it straight down the toilet.
The clamor by Mr. Pasquale for the federal government to confiscate money from one class of Americans simply because he thinks it has too much of it is not about lifting any class of Americans up.
It’s about tearing a class of Americans down.
How Totalitarianism Starts
I am not suggesting that Professor Pasquale is a totalitarian.
I believe that he believes that once the government surtaxes the mega-rich it will not lower the bar to begin surtaxing the run-of-the-mill rich, then the upper middle class, then the middle class, then the lower middle class, then the . . . . well,you get the idea.
But I think it’s a naive belief. And coming from an educated and presumably erudite Yale law professor it shows a surprising ignorance (or is it denial?) of history.
No totalitarian worthy of the name has ever came out of the box and said “let’s take everyone’s property and give it to the State.”
That would never work because people have this little quirk about wanting to keep their own property.
Instead, what the budding totalitarian does is convince people that the other guy’s property needs taking.
Totalitarianism always starts by convincing the mob that you’re only going to take the property of those guys over there – the “not-yous” like the Jew, the merchant, the banker, the doctor, the lawyer, the businessman - who really stole it from you in the first place, anyway.
The Slippery Slope
I dislike slippery slope arguments because they make for bad law.
The gun enthusiast opposes a ban on assault rifles not because he believes those weapons are a good idea, but because he thinks once his opponents achieve the ban they will attempt to ban hunting rifles.
Similarly, the pro-choicer opposes a ban on partial-birth abortion not because he favors the procedure, but because he believes that once his opponents achieve the ban they will redirect their efforts at banning second trimester abortions.
But an avalanche does begin with the fall of a pebble.
If the totalitarian can sell the public on that first confiscation, he sets in motion future confiscations which nothing short of the reincarnation of Eisenhower can stop.
We who are mindful of history must do everything we can to prevent that first confiscation, because we know once it’s achieved more and bigger ones will follow.
16 responses so far ↓
1 Surtax Talk, Or Around the Taxosphere in 80 Seconds // Jul 20, 2009 at 9:00 pm
[...] Taxing the Rich Because You Can: The Beginning of Totalitarianism Bookmark & Share: [...]
2 Surtax on Rich “Meets my Principle” Rich President Says // Jul 23, 2009 at 8:15 am
[...] Taxing the Rich Because You Can: The Beginning of Totalitarianism [...]
3 Healthcare Provisions found in Obama Tax Plan // Nov 2, 2009 at 1:20 pm
[...] [...]
4 Oregon’s Original Revenue Raising Idea: Tax the Rich // Jan 24, 2010 at 10:56 am
[...] Taxing the Rich Because You Can: The Beginning of Totalitarianism [...]
5 German Billionaire Bashes Gates & Buffet for Not Giving Their Money to the State // Aug 13, 2010 at 10:44 am
[...] Taxing the Rich Because You Can: The Beginnings of Totalitarianism Bookmark & Share: [...]
6 If Government is so Great, Why don’t Rich Liberals Donate Money to it? // Oct 19, 2010 at 10:16 am
[...] [...]
7 Progressive Fat Cats: “We’ll Give More Money to the Government if You Force Others to do the Same” // Nov 20, 2010 at 4:41 pm
[...] [...]
8 Neil // Dec 2, 2010 at 12:26 am
I see… So your arguement is that the “unfortuneate” shouldn’t try to collect off the profits of the “fortunate” on Wall Street that were made off of money delivered to them by “the people” . Profits that would not have been possible AT ALL had “we the people” done exectly what the “fortuneate” have been demanding all along and stayed out of private business entirely – which I totally support. But that didn’t happen to you “fortuneate” now, did it? I don’t remember twisting the arm of the “fortuneate” to go beg “we the people” (who should mind our own ‘regulatory business’) for the money to save your investment grade solid gold asses from yourselves and your horrible decisions. Now that the chips are down, in large part because of your endless greed, and the “unfortuneate” are screaming that “we the people” need to fund… oh, say… unemployment, the “fortuneate” want to turn a blind eye to the issue and scream that higher, dare I say ANY taxes are confiscatory and the “fortuneate” shouldn’t have to pay. After the “unfortuneate” were forced to be charitable to you “fortuneate” bailout welfare queens, all you “fortuneate” can do is keep up your petulence and piss and moan about how you “fortuneate” are treated unfairly. Is it really any wonder you “fortuneate” disgust so many “unfortuneate”? I’d advise you rethink your position. There are far many more “unfortunate” than “fortunate” in this country and the last person you want to cross is the one with nothing left to lose. You “fortuneate” seem to be placing more and more people into that “unfortuneate” position every day.
9 Peter // Dec 2, 2010 at 1:37 am
Neil,
I suggest you take an anger management course.
Perhaps if you learned to speak better English you too might count yourself among the “fortuneate.” In other words, instead of wasting your energy hating those who have what you wish you had, you would be better off redirecting it into self-improvement.
But, alas, that’s hard work. It’s a lot easier just to whine.
In my personal and business life I have noticed a recurring pattern: Winner’s blame themselves for their failures and losers blame everyone but themselves.
10 Neil // Dec 2, 2010 at 8:02 pm
Peter,
Since you are quick to make baseless assumptions, may I suggest you take an advanced psychological analysis course? It would help you recognize that any argument that you, as a self proclaimed right-winger, can’t rebut with something more cognitively demanding than recalling the talking points spoon fed to you via your local talk radio station aren’t always presented by someone who’s angry – or unfortunate.
However, since you wish to use grammatic proficiency as the standard by which one measures the losers and “winner’s” in society, I’ll follow your lead and assume you belong to the former as you have assumed of me.
Now that you can’t deny that we’re on equal footing let me assure you that I and my wife, who chooses to stay home with our children because I can afford it, are quite comfortable with the results from my hard work. As the first of the college educated in my family, I assure you I have no desires for anyone else’s life, including yours.
So far, all you’ve demonstrated is that you’re a typical Conservative/Republican and that having a thoughtful, albeit heated debate is just too difficult as you’ve not addressed any of the points I made.
It’s rather sad really. I was hoping you’d bring more to the table than generalized assumptions and insults that are really just projections of your own shortcomings.
11 Neil // Dec 2, 2010 at 8:30 pm
Oh, one other thing… You may want to remove the /index.php/ contained in your URL as it can be used as an entry point for a MySQL and/or JavaScript parameter injection and you DO have some controversial topics presented. This can be handled my making changes to the .htaccess file on your server.
Consider that some friendly advice from another “wealth envious loser” in society… LOL
12 Peter // Dec 2, 2010 at 9:01 pm
Neil,
Thanks for the advice. If someone wants to take me out for believing that people who want the government to take care of them are parasites, so be it. None of us is getting out of here alive.
13 Peter // Dec 2, 2010 at 9:15 pm
Neil,
Your assumption that I listen to local talk radio is baseless. Nevertheless, I am glad to see you’ve calmed down and purchased a spellchecker.
P.S. I had a shortcoming once just to see what it felt like.
14 Neil // Dec 3, 2010 at 11:20 am
Actually, you have a shortcoming everytime you leave your home and go to work, or to the store, or to pay your taxes, specifically it’s your hypocrissy.
You use the government provided roadways to get you from point A to point B – you parasite. Quit using the gasoline pump to get fuel for your vehicle, which is checked by the agriculture commissioner so that you’re certain you’re getting the level gallon you pay for – you parasite. As a matter of fact, quit driving your car altogether, as the federal traffic regulatory comission has made certain that the vehicle you buy is safe and won’t kill you or anyone else – you parasite. I’d tell you to stay sheltered inside your home, but the wiring and plumbing was checked by your local state permit office to make sure you don’t kill yourself when you use your microwave, or die prematurely because of lead in your pipes – you parasite. Oh – and lest we forget your website, which is indeed hosted on servers you pay for, but is made accessable by the fiberoptic backbone laid down by the federal government back when it was still known as DARPAnet. So, close it down and quit sucking off the government data lines – you parasite. Shall we discuss police and fire services? Do you like speaking English, or enjoy our form of Constitutional government? If so, thank those who died in WW2 and the Revolutionary War – you parasite.
You see, you Conservative/Republicans believe that your success somehow takes place in a vacuum and you develop this sick “I got mine, so screw you” mentality. You cower in your self-imposed mental prisons stewing about in your ivory towers and hoard over your wealth with the irrational fear that the “gub’ment” is coming to take your precious away. You forget that on your way up, like it or not, you too used and even continue to use government provided services, for which you must pay a fee (ie. a tax). Your abject and endless whineing over doing so while continuing to enjoy the benefits from said services only serves to show what sort of parasite you really are. Simply put, you want everything the government provides for you that you are accustomed to and is more often than not transparent to you – but you want it all paid for by everyone else, because taxes are for the little people, and well – you’re wealthy damn it! And YOU earned it ALL by yourself, without any help from anyone AT ALL, right?
Wrong.
The sad part is that you actually realize that “none of us gets out alive” and you can’t take your wealth with you, yet you continue to believe that in the end your wealth is still somehow going to matter.
And that, friend, is the largest in your vast array of shortcomings.
15 Peter // Dec 3, 2010 at 5:18 pm
Neil,
Ahh, there’s the “blood-vessel-bursting” Neil I have come to know and love.
Not only are you incapable of speaking English, you can’t read it either. I believe in taxes and pay them. I am opposed to government waste and excessive taxation.
Nice try, though, Neil.
LOL.
P.S. I hope you have a defibrilator nearby for when your insanely intense and irrational anger (directed at a complete stranger, no less) causes you coronary failure.
16 Curtis // Dec 6, 2010 at 4:33 am
ROFLMAO
Neil, nice try in using of “Rules for Radicals”.
I oppose those things that are outside the Constitutionally limited bounds placed upon the National government. I am more than willing to pay for all services that you mentioned as long as they fall under the proper role of the government entity as defined by the Constitution.
Leave a Comment