I guess playing on Twitter has made me think in some shorter bursts this week.
Aside from the terrible optics of again (see ”email@example.com) asking Americans to inform on each other for the crime of Saying Something Bad About The
Messiah pResident (corollary to the Dems-Not-In-White-House “Dissent Is the Highest Form of Patriotism”), the gang that couldn’t shoot straight chose the colors black, red, and white for Snitching is Patriotic site set up to “Fight the Smears”. At least it provided several days of great fun with the #AttackWatch hashtag on Twitter.
Good Job, OFA. Maybe we can set up a youth corpse to build camps for the re-education of unbelievers next. SHOVEL READY, BABY!
Shared Sacrifice, “Fair Share”, and “Skin in the Game”:
The Great Uniter has stepped up his game from the Shared Sacrifice rhetoric, in which he implied that everyone should be happy to give up more to the government so it could do more to “help us” [insert gunfire here] and that of course, those already bearing the biggest burden of government largesse, need to bear even more, because its patriotic, to backpedaling “Shared Sacrifice” because the time had come for the evil, greedy rich people who already bear the majority of the burden of financing Fediathan to pay their “Fair Share”. “Skin in the Game” has vanished from the White House rhetoric, as the administration discovered, much to its dismay that, Americans, including the evil greedy rich ones, and Republicans, can read tax data, including brackets and revenue data, and realized that is wasn’t the evil, greedy rich, or even the $200,000 rich who didn’t have “Skin in the Game”, it was the people who were getting refunds on “credits”, weren’t paying anything in taxes, and proportionately higher recipients of entitlements and other transfer payments who didn’t have “Skin in the Game.”
I’ve really come to enjoy Sean Hannity asking the progs, libs, and those who “know” taxes are necessary to
keep Uncle Sugar’s Beneficiaries dependent ”help people” because they caaaaaarrrrre more than you “How much is enough? How much of every dollar I earn, should I be able to keep?” He usually reminds whomever he is asking that Federal Income Taxes are not the only taxes, as someone who lives in New York State, as he does, also pays state income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, etc., which in his case, ends up being in excess of 50% total.
I have yet to hear a specific answer. I have no illusions that I will.
But here’s the rub: The fact that he and others are asking the question makes a larger point than any specific answer they could give, because it indicates that the “social contract” that proggies and libs always cite as their authority for newer and better spending on
increasing dependency helping the poor has already been broken.
One of the facts that you aren’t likely to hear from your proggie friends about the progressive federal income tax is that when it was permanently introduced pursuant to the 16th Amendment, its big selling point was that it was a tax that would only be levied on “the rich”, which was true (only 1% of Americans paid ANY income tax at the time), but soon changed, as the federal appetite for Other People’s Money and the power it could buy, grew, making it necessary to extend the tax to those who were never intended to fall victim to it, setting a precedent for progressive lies which continue to this day.
So when you hear your progressive friends mouthing off about how the economy can be fixed by the evil greedy rich people paying “their fair share” (i.e. even more than the more than most everyone else they already pay), ask them how much is enough, and then tell them while they’re thinking of ways to avoid answer the question, that you’d also like them to explain why what was their “fair share” last year, or the year before, or the year before that, is now suddenly less than their “fair share”. What has changed? (Other than unbelievably reckless and profligate spending of a disingenuous narcissistic pResdent and a Democratic Congress that brought us the biggest three-year deficit in history, but couldn’t be bothered to pass a budget?)