If I Were a Rich Man
I heard this commentary on my way to work this morning and was a bit unsure as to my final opinion on the matter.
Why don't y'all help clarify me.
I've always preferred the government taking less of our money and simply doing less. In the end, most Governments tend to create so much "red tape" and regulations that they seem to accomplish less than private entities might when it comes to helping society.
I also feel that the more "charity" work the government does, the less the body of Christ's church (or anyone else) feels they need to do to help those around them. The excuse being "I pay my taxes..." Thank you Mr. Scrooge.
I'm also not fond of the folks in Washington DC attempting to figure out what would be best for the general public. So few of them are a part of the general public and a great majority of them are more focused on doing what it takes to get reelected than what it takes to build a great and Loving society.
I also tend to feel that a tax system that generates a huge pot of money could lead to a more Communistic society. I'm all for Pure Communism, with everyone putting all of their wealth/assets into one basket and then everyone taking only what they need. But, I'm not all for a bunch of Rich Men in Washington DC determining what each one of us needs. I realize that Pure Communism can't work unless all people act selflessly, and therefore Pure Communism could only work in a society with a Strict (even Religious) ethics code.
So, I suppose, I'd rather have the rich folks who made the money spend it to help those in need than to have the rich folks in Washington DC attempt to determine how to best meet the needs of their constituents.
I realize this means that the people with the money might not spend it on causes that I think are all that great, but I'd expect more would get done.
|