I found it very interesting how many people are so eager to have the government redistribute other people's money. Most of those who are wild about Bernie Sanders KNOW they aren't going to be supplying the money for all the goodies he is promising; they don't have any money.
Image a group of 100 people. Bob, who is a chronic smoker, has lung cancer. Just about everyone feels that is unfortunate but fifty believe someone should do something to help. Rather than fork out money from their pockets, they call a vote. The fifty plus Bob vote to pay for Bob's cancer treatment while the other 49 vote against. Majority rules so Bob's cancer treatment is paid. Here's my question: If the 50 were so concerned about Bob's health, why didn't they raise the money among themselves? Why force the other 49? Well, because they had to pay a lot less that way. They soothed their consciences by donating the money of others.
We now live in a country where nearly 50% of the population pays no income tax. Sure, they pay Social Security and Medicare via payroll taxes but when looking at the cost of other government services (military, welfare, food stamps, foreign aid, bank bailouts, etc.), it has no impact on their taxation. That is a recipe for the untaxed to vote for ever increasing benefits that will further burden those who do pay taxes. It is easy to be generous with other people's money. I'd like to see how these folks would vote if they had to foot the bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment