Anesthetized by the tax rebate

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

Anesthetized by the tax rebate

By Geneva Overholser, 8/23/2001

WASHINGTON

IN 1975 IN ZAIRE, two baby boys - children of a friend of mine - died of measles. Against such a rock-hard wall of reality, I thought, our delicate desire to do good in the world is sorely challenged. Last week, opening my check from the US government, I had the same feeling.

During my two years in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), I was surrounded by people with so wretchedly little food, money, clothing, health care, or shelter that I came to an awful conclusion. We have two choices in life: We can give everything we own to the people suffering around us and write to everyone we know to beg them to give everything they own and still barely touch the suffering. Or we can become inured to it.

I became inured. Oh, I did a little for the people I knew best, but the suffering was so huge and my resources so inadequate to it that for the most part I toughened over.

Later, moving from Africa to Europe, I realized that my conscience had been incompletely anesthetized. A great weight was lifted when I discovered a choice other than those two awful ones I had recognized in Africa. In this place, so much more fortunate, people had chosen, through cooperative action, to achieve a substantial level of good in a practical fashion.

When I came home to this still more fortunate land, the evident homelessness and inequality were unsettling. Still, the comparison with Zaire was stark; America, it seemed, provided a balance a citizen could live with in good conscience.

With periods of exception, I have gone on feeling more hopeful than hopeless about our being, fundamentally, a people devoted to working together to do good against difficult realities.

Then came this check in the mail: ''Tax relief for America's workers.'' I despise those words. I am not a worker who needs ''relief.'' Neither - chances are - are you, or any of those who will write me deploring ''big government'' and demanding I simply return my check, as if that could take care of everything.

The people who really need some relief are getting none, or little, of it. Indeed, they're the ones we're taking it from - in lost potential for programs providing health care, housing assistance, better education, or child-care support.

Forty percent of the riches of this rebate are going to the wealthiest 1 percent of us. ''Relief'' is an absurd word for that.

President Bush, privileged from birth, takes a different approach toward doing good. He talks - a lot - about values. In Colorado's splendid Rocky Mountain National Park recently, he spoke of the importance of teaching children values and creating ''communities of character.''

We Americans are exceptionally good at talking about values, especially how superior ours are to those of the average world citizen. Some of us appear to feel that talking loudly enough about values absolves us from actually having to practice them.

News reports of Bush's remarks in Colorado suggest that he is shifting the focus of his presidency from cold policy concerns such as taxes, energy supply, and missile defenses to the warmer, human world of values. But these two spheres are not separable. Our federal tax system, like our federal budget, is an expression of our values.

There is, we come to understand, no easy answer for how to behave well amid many needs. We can't do everything - and therefore often feel that doing nothing is not only an attractive, but a rational, choice. Pondering this dilemma, Simon Blackburn, a Cambridge philosopher, in his book, ''Being Good,'' offers a helpful thought: ''The center of ethics must be occupied by things we can reasonably demand of each other.''

What, in this country, can we reasonably expect? I'd say, some level of concern for rising income inequality. Also for the 12 million to 13 million children living in poverty. And for the 43 million Americans who have no health insurance, especially the 10 million among them who are children under 18. For kids in terrible schools, and for those at home alone afterward.

Others would have different priorities. Agreeing we can meet needs effectively only in concerted action, we then struggle to agree on which to meet - always knowing that government can't meet them all.

But this struggle is not what this tax cut, so rich with relief for the wealthy, shows us to be engaged in. It shows us having made the other choice: to become inured. I'm just hoping our consciences are incompletely anesthetized.

Geneva Overholser is a syndicated columnist.

This story ran on page A13 of the Boston Globe on 8/23/2001. © Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company.



-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), August 24, 2001

Answers

I agree. Very lucid explaination of the state of affairs in this great land. Yeah, I got my tax rebate and I bought a couple rolls of silver dollars. Turned a useless piece of paper into something valuable. Amazing that people will allow you to take that worthless fed note and trade them for gold and silver. Even more amazing , one can take ones plastic credit cards and use them to obtain Gold and Silver now for a promise to pay later. Using credit cards allows Americans to create notes out of thin air just like the Fed. WOW! That just blows my mind. You can ruin the Guvs plan to stimulate the economy, (by Americans using the rebate to buy Walmart China junk) instead buy whatever gold or silver coins you can get with you rebate money. This will really screw up plans. What a message it will send to Alan Greespan. This might unhinge the gold market and cause gold to rise to its rightful price. The rebate can be used for their undoing. Ha!

-- The Dog Bites (The@cats.ass), August 24, 2001.

Debra,

Yes, there are poor people in America. There always will be. The problem with the premise of your little article is that socialism and communism do not work. Even at a 100% tax rate, there would still be poor in America.

The writer was lucid enough to realize that the best standard of living in the world was here in the United States of America. Unfortunately, she wasn't smart enough to realize that personal and economic freedom are the keys as to why that is the case.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), August 24, 2001.

Well, now Debra, these are the type of letters that make me wonder why anyone would object to the tax rebate. After all, you've been just given some of your money back by the government to spend as you choose. If indeed Zaire is important to you, I assume you donated it to that cause. I assume you did, didn't you? Would you rather the government had kept it and spent it on the B-2 bomber project?

This BS I simply don't understand. I was not entirely in favor of the tax rebate for financial reasons -- I'm sort of a deficit reduction guy; I think it will help more in the long run.

But why anyone -- even the most Stalinist liberal -- would object to having their own money returned to them to do as they want escapes me entirely. The Feds just gave you $300 or so dollars to DO WITH WHAT YOU WILL. If doing good is what you want to do, then go out and do good with it. Give it to your favorite shelter, cause or country.

Or, would you rather have the Bush administration give away your tax dollars for you.

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 24, 2001.


E.H.:

Howzit goin. From my viewpoint the $600 that I got is just the hook. The game will be a great redistribution of wealth towards the top. Sure, it won't hurt me but it will not contribute to social stability. Certainly not.

The larger question deals with Africa; that part south of the desert. With limited funds; should it just be written-off. May be the only way, or not.

What is your opinion?

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


Z -- goin well. Heading for a week in the Wind River Range next Monday. As to your question regarding the tax rebate, it's a thoughful one to which I do not have a precise answer. But on this question, I suspect I am a little less liberal than you.

As to rebates -- Minnesota's sort of the pioneer in this area, and has been doing it for a couple of years already. I must admit that I like the concept that if revenues exceed forecasts, it's better to return the money to the taxpayer than it is to try and find something new and exciting to spend it on. Sort of keeps everyone honest. If it were up to me, I'd pay down the debt. But, politicians do not seem to find this an option.

Whether this will end up being the first move in a game resulting in "a great redistribution of wealth towards the top," I can not say. I doubt it. It issue of govenment spending will, in reality, never be one of rich vs. poor. What it always will be is a matter of balance. How much do you take? And where do you spend it after you have taken it?

I am self employed. Minnesota is a high tax state. It has a lot of amenities that those taxes pay for, and I appreciate them. But, what with paying Federal Tax, State Tax, and having no employer to pay my share of SSI and similar taxes (plus, of course, sales and property taxes), my tax hit (at last calculation) as about 50% of income, or slightly more. And, since I've never had much of a work ethic, I don't make a ton of money practicing law (and giving my non-profit clients a 50-75% discount on billing). I would consider myself comfortable and middle class, but given my life style I doubt that my income will reach $100K anytime soon.

There are a lot of times when it occurs to me that paying 50% of my income in taxes is unreasonable. If this were to fall to 45% (or, god forbid, even 40%) -- does this mean that wealth has been "redistributed" because I have been left with a little more than I was before? And, if they give it to me, I assure you I could make much better use of it than the various governments that tax me could.

So, what are your thought on the matter?

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 24, 2001.



Howdy EH:

I have done the Wind River a few times. You will have a great time. Which part are you attempting. I am heading to the North Cascades next week. Hope to have a good one too.

I don't really get my shorts in a bunch over this stuff. But it is clear that the tax cut, as presented, represents a large transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper class. The idea of privatizing SSI represents a larger transfer of wealth to the corporations, IMHO [I could give you the data but you already know that]. Hey, this won't hurt me, but, I am concerned about the effect of social stability.

We have good data from the Weimar Republic. We know what happened.

So it goes.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


Uh huh.

And not a word about the fact that the SS "tax" ends once a person has made 65K. Talk about hosing the middle class, that one hoses us AND the poor.

If Dubbya wants to be "fair" about taxes and taxation rates, why hasn't this issue been addressed?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), August 24, 2001.


EH:

By-the-by; have you tried the Absorka range. Wese locals call it the Absorkies [sic]. Some great climbing; if you get into trouble you are by yourself. There are also a lot of these big brown hulks that people refer to as bears. Always carried a 30-30 win there. Never loaded it, but the bear experts in Bozeman indicated that having the gun would keep them away. Don't have toothmarks in my body so they must be right. Only saw them at a distance. They go up to the base of the cliffs. I think it is burning at the moment [from my last email] so the WRiver is a better choice this year.

Best Wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


Unk:

By-the-by: You are correct. Couldn't agree with you more. Don't hear to many folks talking about it at the moment. EH and I just got carried away talking about our mountain haunts.

Best Wishes,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


Unk:

A second, by-the-by: I remember sitting on a beach in Florida and watching the sun rise. Really great. Was it in the east or west. After a night in Florida, you don't know.

If you have spent the night in a base camp at 12,000 t0 14,000 ft, surrounded by snow in July, the sun is a god and you know where it will come from. It is much more important. Then you really understand sun worship. *<)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.



Z,

I spent many a night (and day) as a very young lad with my father in the Rockies, I know of what you speak.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), August 24, 2001.


Hello, Z and Unc --

Initially, we were talking about the recent tax rebate. I think that the recent (and rather limited) rebates were a good way of getting money back to the middle class taxpayers, to do with what they will, without becoming some sort of dire scheme to redistrute wealth. I still think that is a good idea. I am concerned about your (Z's) tendency to see this as something with dire omens for the future -- all I can say, Z, is it is what it is. A few hundred buck back to those how have paid taxes in the past.

That said, on to more enlightening subjects:

(1): Wind River Range. Hope to go from Elkhart Park to Green River Lakes. Always loved the Wind River Range, assuming the bugs are not too bad in any given year. One of these years, I must climb Pingora!

(2) Absorkas (and/or the Beartooths): I've got the guide book (the recent Falcon Press edition), but right now the Rivers look more interesting (particularly as I can arrange a shuttle for this trip).

But, of course, – I'd be interested in any suggestions you have for fuure trips in the Absorkas or Beartooths. And, also, suggestions regarding the Sawtooths (Idaho), which is also on my current planning list.

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 24, 2001.


EH:

The Absorkies as I knew them went for east of Yellowstone to S. Montana. From folks that I still know there, there are a few folks who do guiding. I am from the ol'school; live or die with what I know. It and the Sawthooth and parts of Idaho are the last wild places left in the Rockies.

Aw, but the North Cascades are so nice. In the lower 48, I pick the Tetons and the N. Cascades as the two most bestests [g] places.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


I have nothing to say about tax policy except to observe that EH's estimate of 50+% is accurate and that that level of taxation is too high. A too-high tax burden actually decreases government revenue because it decreases the incentive to do taxable activities.

Ms Overalls original point about the ongoing misery in Africa or wherever raises a different question to me. How do we, any of us, sleep at night knowing that the vilest atrocities and sufferings are happening at this very moment in many places (maybe right next door). What's the line of poetry?-------ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.

Well, does it? I don't think so. Not even Mother Theresa or Eleanor Roosevelt could internalize everyone's suffering. The reason we sleep at night while slaughter and disaster occur to others is because we do not know the "others". If we do not know someone, we do NOT feel their pain. A good thing too, we would go crazy if we felt everyone's pain.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), August 24, 2001.


There is an abundant middle ground between complete apathy and internalizing everyone's suffering. It might not be a bad thing for us in this prosperous nation, to occasionally reflect upon the amount of trivia that we take seriously.

-- David L (bumpkin@dnet.net), August 24, 2001.


Lars:

ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.

I am Dunn with that. *<)))

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


Lars:

Plas nt fr th night that I am nt using th lttrs "e" or "o". U knw what I man. :)

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 24, 2001.


"In the lower 48, I pick the Tetons and the N. Cascades as the two most bestests [g] places."

Please, please, P-L-E-A-S-E!! Tell this to everyone you know. Broadcast it far and wide. Plant this thought nationally in millions of craniums. Use pheromones if need be. Just get as many folks as possible OUT of MY favorite places (not to be spoken of in public any more than a good jew would speak the name of JHWH)!!

I will pay you if necessary... just name your price.

-- Little Nipper (canis@minor.net), August 24, 2001.


Ahh ... gentlemen ... little thread drift goin on here?

Z, scrt cds! Can I play t? I'll mak nt that n 'e' or 'o' ar t b usd in this thrad! But I hav t knw ... what d you man?

:D

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), August 24, 2001.


Z, ds it hav t d with yu bing Dunn? LOL

-- Debra (Thisis@it.com), August 25, 2001.

The mathematics of Jahweh, JHWH

-- (paracelsus@Pb.Au), August 25, 2001.

Wow, so that was written by Dominick Dunn?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), August 25, 2001.

E.H. Porter,

Going back to your first post to this thread, to Debra, and Geneva Overholser, and those who think like them, it is not their goal to have the freedom to financially support whatever cause it is that they deem worthy. It is their goal to have the government force not every citizen, but only certain citizens, to financially support whatever cause it is that they deem worthy.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), August 25, 2001.

Hey Porter, at least show us the statute that mandates your turning over 50% of your income. Surely you have looked THAT one up. Come, enlighten everyone.

-- KoFE (your@town.USSA), August 25, 2001.

KoFE--

Don't be so dense. EH was talking about total taxes (Federal income, state income, state sales, property, "hidden" (gasoline tax, etc). In addition, he is self employed. I believe that doubles SSI. Here are his words. Why don't you figure your total tax burden and report back to us? Do you seriously think that you are undertaxed?

"But, what with paying Federal Tax, State Tax, and having no employer to pay my share of SSI and similar taxes (plus, of course, sales and property taxes), my tax hit (at last calculation) as about 50% of income, or slightly more."

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), August 25, 2001.


Fuck off Lars, I'll make any suggestion to Porter I see fit.

This so-called lawyer's best shot, when it comes to debating me about the existence of that statute, has been to resort to name calling, and invective, or just dodging the issue all together. I think that's a bit disingenuos for someone who supposedly has so much knowledge at hand, and who seems to enjoy the debate; this is, UP TO A CERTAIN POINT.

But here's a hint again; it doesn't exist, or else he would have posted it long ago.

-- KoFE (your@town.USSA), August 25, 2001.


Lars -- Sory about KoFE. By way of explaination, he is a tax nut. So, what he meant was that he doesn't think that there is any law requiring you, I or anyone else to give the government a dime. Iuppose KoFE is just one of those pieces of baggage that I've picked up in my journey though life, and who will occasionally be a nuisance anytime I post on this forum. But, hey, it could be worse.

Now, I obviously disagree with KoFE, or I wouldn't be paying what I think is an excessive tax rate. But, I always found the parts of the Internal Revenue Code saying that "there is imposed a tax" to be fairly convincing, as was the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Plus, of course, they do bad things to you if you do not pay, which in the case of attorneys involves revocation of a law licence.

In a way, KoFE is kind of sad. KoFE has a lot of old, boring arguments (frequently involving the cross reference of 90 year old cases with the current code) that I got tired of a year or so ago. When I first ran into him, I was rather curious as to why he believes what he believes, and actually tried to cite relevant law to him and/or to discuss the issue with him. Mistake. Unfortunately, he's also what I call a "snip kiddy"; he gets all his information from tax protest bulletin boards. I discovered that he doesn't care about what the law actually is and doesn't read it anyway.

So, now, I just have gotten used to the fact that anything I post around here containing the word "tax" or the word "goverment" will get a response from KoFE saying that I should post something telling him what law requires that he pay taxes. Reference to the Internal Revenue Code will not do it.

So, sorry for attracting KoFE to this thread.

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 25, 2001.


Oh, and Lars -- when I said my tax burden as about 50%, here in Minnesota I did not need to figure in so called "hidden taxes." Self employment tax alone is about 14.5% State tax here is around 5-7% With that as a basis, it doesn't take much to get up to a 50% tax hit.

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 25, 2001.

Yeah, I wonder what "hidden" taxes can add up to? This is a lifestyle issue. A heavy smoker pays a ton of taxes that I don't. Likewise a long distance automoble commuter, even if he doesn't drive a gas-guzzler. I don't even know where else there are significant hidden taxes. I guess that's why they are called "hidden". Suffice to say that most are highly regressive. There should be a law that requires prominent disclosure of hidden taxes.

Another tax, one that I don't necessarily oppose is a user tax. For example, a nominal toll to use a bridge or an Xway strikes me as appropriate.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), August 25, 2001.


Yes Debra, you got the joke. But why do we need vowels at all. I can trace the family name to the end of the last ice age. Those folks didn't use vowels at all.

S hw ffcnt t b.

They did okay, of course they probably communicated with grunts. Neo-republicans they were. *<)))

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 25, 2001.


I don't think Poles use vowels to this day.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), August 25, 2001.

Precisely as I said. I could almost have written that for you Porter. "where a tax is imposed" is from the 1040 instruction manual, Porter. When are you gonna come clean, and admit you've never seen the friggin statute that directs you to file?

>"they do nasty things to you like take your law license"< Why didn't you say you were being blackmailed in the first place? I could care less if you actually do file, by the way. Just stop the lying, and insinuations that you know the statute exist, when you can't produce it.

-- KoFE (your@town.USSA), August 25, 2001.


I love you, KoFE. But, you should tell your mother not to let you stay up so late; it makes you cranky.

Plus, you've gotta stop getting all your information from your fellow tax nuts. If you're going to the a full fledged tax nut and not a snip kiddy, you're going to actually have to read the tax code. I belive that the phrase "there is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual . . . a tax" actually comes from section (1) of the Code, 26 U.S.C. 1.

I don't know what you think that means. I think it means you've got to pay taxes.

-- E.H.Porter (just.wondering@about.it), August 25, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ