Rich People Should Pay More for Government Because They Get More from It

[mhatrw]

Two of the most successfully promoted utter falsehoods in the history of political public relations are that rich people "use government less" and favor "small government."



Far more than anybody else, rich people require a strong, stable, property rights championing government. By far, rich people benefit the most from the "free" congress of society that a strong, order-first government provides. By far, rich people have the most to lose if social chaos overtakes social order.

The idea that rich people (or their right wing handmaidens) want small government is absurd. Do you know how much it costs the US Navy to secure all of the world's seas in order to promote unfettered trade? Who benefits most from this huge taxpayer boondoggle that allows globalists to enlist the cheapest labor without paying themselves to secure its transit?

The only kind of government that rich people want to make smaller is the tiny portion of government (other than Social Security and Medicare, which rich people also want to eliminate or at least severely cut) that benefits average citizens, veterans, government workers, and/or the poor. Have you ever heard of rich people campaigning tirelessly or commissioning think tanks to defund corporate welfare, the CIA, the NSA, the DOD, Homeland Security, the FAA, FEMA, the National Guard, the Department of Transportation, jails, fire departments, forest fire fighters or highway workers?

Q. What do you call a rich person in the hinterlands of Afghanistan?
A. A warlord.

Do you think rich US citizens would rather use the US government or hire and train their own standing armies to protect their riches as well as their current and future investment opportunities?

[merrily]

1. I don't think people on welfare are straining too many roads and bridges.

I would be very surprised if poor people were the reason the City of Boston spent millions to make a public waterfront park smaller so more private yachts and boats could park in Boston harbor and perhaps stay in the pricey waterfront and waterfront adjacent lodgings.

I think a lot of the reason for the New Deal and the Great Society were to enable wealthier people to feel safer from the specter of a revolution ala Russia and rioting. Ditto the Cold War.

You can find example after example, massive and comparatively small.

[Xipe Totec]

2. What property are police and fire departments protecting and serving? The hovel, or the McMansion?

The more 'stuff' you have, the greater is your cost to society to 'protect and serve'.

That includes your stuff stashed in banks and investment firms.

But yea, that's the point your making and I agree 100%

[Scuba]

3. K&R

[sorechasm]

4. Best argument for 'Paying their Fair Share'

The list could be pages long: Public Transportation allows them to pay low wages to workers who don't need to drive, strong Building Code Enforcement provides higher return on investment for Real Estate, reliable police and fire departments lowers their insurance rates, use of the Public Highways for advertising, reaping rewards of the federal highway system that allows Just-in-Time deliveries by eliminating warehouse storage, etc., etc.,

99% pay most of the taxes supporting these services. The 1% reap most of the benefits, many of whom pay no taxes.

Bernie needs to sing these arguments from the rooftops.

[mhatrw]

7. Public airwaves, public water departments, public sewage systems, publicly funded R&D, ...

[Demeter]

5. Read my sig line!

[sorechasm]

6. The 1% are 'Socialist' according to the following Business Model:

'Socialize the Costs' (make others pay) and 'Privatize the Profits' (reap all the rewards).

As described by many DU posters more talented than myself.

[mhatrw]

8. The war industry is the most egregious example of this.

And nobody in power from either party ever challenges the war industry's budget or profiteers.