http://www.towleroad.com/2011/09/warrenwarfare.html
1.) Lizzy says, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own.”
Now this is fairly obvious but Lizzy immediately introduces from this premise that people who have gotten rich in this country (at least the ones who did it without sucking off the teat of the Federal Government that Lizzy wants to grow) have gotten rich because the Federal Government, through the tax dollars of the citizenry, created the environment where wealth could be generated.
Now, we can concede this, after a fashion. The whole idea that the US Constitution provides the dynamic where social order can exist and so where wealth can be pursued is something admitted to by all. However, all because Government has a role in sustaining order doesn’t mean that government gets to steal from those who produce and generate wealth.
2.) Lizzy says, “You moved your goods on the roads that the rest of us paid for.”
One would like to ask Lizzy if those who are moving their goods didn’t also pay for the roads that their goods are being shipped upon? One also wants to ask Lizzy if the consumers that helped pay for those roads aren’t likewise advantaged by the ability to receive goods shipped as the producers are advantaged by being able to ship their goods? In other words, it is not as if all those who paid for the roads are not at the same time advantaged by the roads they are paid for, and that quite apart from providing justification to gouge those who create and generate wealth.
Second, on this score, Lizzy seems to extrapolate easily from those things governments should do with money raised in taxation (build roads) to those things that governments shouldn’t do with money stolen in taxation. The US Constitution clearly enumerates and delegates what the Federal government can and cannot do. Lizzy wants to take examples from what the Federal Government can do and apply it to what the Federal Government cannot do.
3.)Lizzy says, “You (the rich) hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.”
If ever anyone was taken advantage of in a business deal it has been US businesses who have been put in the position of having to hire workers who are graduates of Government indoctrination centers (government schools). The US educational system dumbs down intentionally its students and so provides a sub-standard worker for American businesses to hire.
Second, once again, the rich have also paid to educate (for good or for ill) the workers they eventually hired. It is not as if “the rich” are getting off without contributing to the cause.
Third, where in the US Constitution does it enumerate and delegate that the role of the Federal Government is to educate youth?
4.) Lizzy then talks about police forces and fire departments that the citizenry paid for that the wealthy use to protect themselves and their property.
First, Lizzy is running for a Federal office. This is important because it is the States who provide monies for State needs such as police and fire-fighters and not the Feds. Why should Lizzy be making a point justifying Federal taxation by appealing to State functions?
5.) Lizzy talks about “social contract” and “paying forward.”
First, the only social contract that is valid in this country is the US Constitution and the US Constitution is a document that is dedicated to constraining the delimiting the size and scope of the US Government. This is important to note because Lizzy wants to use abstract ideas like “social contract” and “paying it forward,” as excuses to enlarge the already Leviathan State.
Secondly, “pay it forward” to whom? Is Lizzy seriously suggesting that by paying exorbitant tax rates that the produces who generate and create wealth are doing their duty by “paying it forward.”
Third, what Lizzy leaves unsaid is that by “paying it forward” to the State what is happening at the same time is that the family is de-capitalized and so is unable to pay forward an inheritance to the generation that comes behind. What Lizzy apparently desires is that the Wealthy capitalize the State in their paying it forward at the expense of capitalizing their own family. What is required is that some strangers has it paid forwarded while the heirs are left unpaid forwarded.
Lizzy is offering classical Socialism. The State is to be prioritized and the State is to be the determiner of where charity is assigned.
However, Scott Brown how Lizzy Warren is running against is only marginally better.
Can anything good come out of New England?
