nelson
04-16-2009, 11:49 PM
The Free Market is the most transformative of economic systems. It fosters creativity and inventiveness. It produces new industries, products, and services, as it improves upon existing ones. With millions of individuals freely engaged in an infinite number and variety of transactions each day, it is impossible to even conceive of all the changes and plans for changes occurring in our economy at any given time. The free market creates more wealth and opportunities for more people than any other economic model.
The Marxist class-struggle formulation, which puts the proletariat ("working class") against the bourgeoisie ("wealthy merchant class"), still serves as the principle theoretical and rhetorical justification for the Statist's assault on the free market. But it is an anathema to the free market in that the individual has unto himself the power to make of himself what he chooses. There is no static class structure layered atop the free market. The free market is a mutable, dynamic, vibrant system of individual interactions that engages all aspects of the human character. For this reason, the Conservative believes the free market is a vital bulwark against statism. And it would appear the Statist agrees, for he is relentless in his assault on it. Indeed, the Statist's rejection of the Constitution's limits on federal power is justified primarily, albeit not exclusively, on material grounds.
In the name of "economic justice" and "equality" the Statist creates the perception of class struggle through a variety of inventions, including the "progressive" income tax. In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx wrote, "In the most advanced countries the following will be pretty generally applicable: a heavy progressive or graduated income tax."
A recent study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that when measuring household taxes (income taxes and employee Social Security contributions), the United States "has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10 percent of the population," placing a heavier burden on high-income households than other industrialized nations do. The latest Congressional Budget Office figures show that the top 1 percent of income earners in the United States paid 39 percent of federal income taxes while earning 18 percent of pretax income and the top 5 percent of income earners paid 61 percent of federal income taxes while earning 31 percent of pretax income. Indeed, the top 40 percent of income earners paid 99.4 percent of federal income taxes. The bottom 40 percent of income earners paid no federal income tax and received 3.8 percent from the tax system. And the middle 20 percent of income earners pay only 4.4 percent of federal income taxes.
While the Conservative, like Adam Smith, does not object to wealthier individuals paying more to finance legitimate functions of government, the government has grown well beyond the limits placed on it by the Constitution, particularly since the New Deal. Redistributing wealth is a central objective of the progressive income tax, which Marx would endorse and Smith would reject. For the Statist, there must be a class struggle and it must be a never-ending struggle, for it is perhaps his most valuable weapon in his war against the individual, the free market, and ultimately civil society. The Statist, therefore, not only opposes efforts to eliminate the progressive income tax, including such alternatives as the FAIR tax (a national sales tax) or the flat tax (a flat-rate income tax), he opposes most any income tax reductions that might weaken the "class structure."
Inasmuch as economic equality is unachievable, even in the most repressive socialist states, it serves the Statist's purpose to contrive a class system in which individuals are grouped by officially sanctioned, arbitrary economic categories. In this way, the Statist stirs up class envy. The free market is, therefore, said to be incapable of serving the public interest, for it produces unjust results, thereby requiring further government intervention. The Statist also attempts to manipulate the intensity of the "class struggle" by routinely redefining terms and categories of wealth--who qualifies as the detested "rich," the righteous "middle class" and the disenfranchised "poor."
Just a couple of pages from an entire book packed full of absolute reality. This is from the "On The Free Market" chapter... but I have found each chapter so far just excellent from a fundamental, philosophical standpoint. Liberals will hate it with a passion, of course. But it's been number one on the New York Times best seller list for weeks with good reason. My brother gave it to me yesterday, I'm only halfway through, but already I can see... it's very much worth the purchase and read. Just thought I'd post a little for those who may have heard about it and are considering it.
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
Mark R. Levin
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850
The Marxist class-struggle formulation, which puts the proletariat ("working class") against the bourgeoisie ("wealthy merchant class"), still serves as the principle theoretical and rhetorical justification for the Statist's assault on the free market. But it is an anathema to the free market in that the individual has unto himself the power to make of himself what he chooses. There is no static class structure layered atop the free market. The free market is a mutable, dynamic, vibrant system of individual interactions that engages all aspects of the human character. For this reason, the Conservative believes the free market is a vital bulwark against statism. And it would appear the Statist agrees, for he is relentless in his assault on it. Indeed, the Statist's rejection of the Constitution's limits on federal power is justified primarily, albeit not exclusively, on material grounds.
In the name of "economic justice" and "equality" the Statist creates the perception of class struggle through a variety of inventions, including the "progressive" income tax. In the Communist Manifesto, Karl Marx wrote, "In the most advanced countries the following will be pretty generally applicable: a heavy progressive or graduated income tax."
A recent study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that when measuring household taxes (income taxes and employee Social Security contributions), the United States "has the most progressive tax system and collects the largest share of taxes from the richest 10 percent of the population," placing a heavier burden on high-income households than other industrialized nations do. The latest Congressional Budget Office figures show that the top 1 percent of income earners in the United States paid 39 percent of federal income taxes while earning 18 percent of pretax income and the top 5 percent of income earners paid 61 percent of federal income taxes while earning 31 percent of pretax income. Indeed, the top 40 percent of income earners paid 99.4 percent of federal income taxes. The bottom 40 percent of income earners paid no federal income tax and received 3.8 percent from the tax system. And the middle 20 percent of income earners pay only 4.4 percent of federal income taxes.
While the Conservative, like Adam Smith, does not object to wealthier individuals paying more to finance legitimate functions of government, the government has grown well beyond the limits placed on it by the Constitution, particularly since the New Deal. Redistributing wealth is a central objective of the progressive income tax, which Marx would endorse and Smith would reject. For the Statist, there must be a class struggle and it must be a never-ending struggle, for it is perhaps his most valuable weapon in his war against the individual, the free market, and ultimately civil society. The Statist, therefore, not only opposes efforts to eliminate the progressive income tax, including such alternatives as the FAIR tax (a national sales tax) or the flat tax (a flat-rate income tax), he opposes most any income tax reductions that might weaken the "class structure."
Inasmuch as economic equality is unachievable, even in the most repressive socialist states, it serves the Statist's purpose to contrive a class system in which individuals are grouped by officially sanctioned, arbitrary economic categories. In this way, the Statist stirs up class envy. The free market is, therefore, said to be incapable of serving the public interest, for it produces unjust results, thereby requiring further government intervention. The Statist also attempts to manipulate the intensity of the "class struggle" by routinely redefining terms and categories of wealth--who qualifies as the detested "rich," the righteous "middle class" and the disenfranchised "poor."
Just a couple of pages from an entire book packed full of absolute reality. This is from the "On The Free Market" chapter... but I have found each chapter so far just excellent from a fundamental, philosophical standpoint. Liberals will hate it with a passion, of course. But it's been number one on the New York Times best seller list for weeks with good reason. My brother gave it to me yesterday, I'm only halfway through, but already I can see... it's very much worth the purchase and read. Just thought I'd post a little for those who may have heard about it and are considering it.
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
Mark R. Levin
http://www.amazon.com/Liberty-Tyranny-Conservative-Mark-Levin/dp/1416562850