John Stuart Mill suggests in his article \u201cAvoid Millionaire Tax or End Homelessness\u201d that an additional tax on the rich is necessary to aid the homeless. Any tax levied for any purpose other than the defense of life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness is an overreach by the government. Increasing taxes on one segment of the society for the benefit of the other is even more unjust. Mill claims the rich are \u201centitled\u201d if they believe it is unfair for them to be taxed to aid the less fortunate. However, it is those who expect to benefit from the labor of others who are entitled. Mill frames the issue as rich vs. poor, but in actuality the issue is the industrious vs. the unproductive.<\/p>\n
Man should be guided by the principle of pursuing his own happiness, not the collective happiness or a greater good as Mill asserts. He claims, \u201cwe should strive for a better society as a whole.\u201d What he fails to understand is there is no \u201cwe\u201d; there is no \u201csociety.\u201d America is nothing more than a collection of individuals pursuing their own interests. If you believe otherwise, then you also believe that the interests of some men are to be sacrificed to the interests and wishes of others. A nation requiring men to sacrifice their products for the benefit of others reduces some to slavery. A slave can be categorized as anyone who doesn\u2019t benefit from their labor and that\u2019s what this tax will do. It will take the hardworking, the productive and force them to work so others can benefit.<\/p>\n
Every man has a right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. Mill and other collectivists have misinterpreted these as absolute rights. They could not be more wrong, the right to property means one has the right to pursue property, not to have it provided for him. The purpose of the government is to protect these aforementioned rights. A tax on the rich doesn\u2019t serve the purpose of protecting individual rights; it in fact does the opposite. The government is removing the individual\u2019s right to their property, which was earned by their own pursuits. This new affront is just another example of government fast approaching the stage where it does whatever it pleases; extracting taxes from anyone for any \u201cpublic project\u201d it wishes. The government, with its monopoly on force, will cause death and destruction, as does every country that resorts to socialist policies to repair inequality.<\/p>\n
The government officials who wish to increase taxes for the benefit of those in need are attempting to accomplish a desirable goal. However, they are foregoing their mental processes when they forget the cost of their desires. That cost is the potential loss of productivity by removing money from those who have proven they can produce. The Sears Tower is not produced in a society where the rich can\u2019t pursue greater wealth, nor is the skyline of New York City. Without money in the hands of the productive we risk living in the realm of \u201cAnthem,\u201d where we admire three-story buildings as great works of architecture and the candle as the ultimate scientific discovery.<\/p>\n
We cannot be fooled by the rhetoric of Mayor Steinburg, Sen. Pro Tem Kevin or John Stewart Mill. They spew terms like \u201cpublic interest\u201d and \u201cfor the benefit of society\u201d to mask their real motives of obtaining power and prestige. These slogans of altruism give a semi-plausible form to their urges of power lust. Protecting the rights of the individual requires a rejection of this false altruism.<\/p>\n
May my liberal peers forgive me for writing this article.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
John Stuart Mill suggests in his article \u201cAvoid Millionaire Tax or End Homelessness\u201d that an additional tax on the rich is necessary to aid the homeless. Any tax levied for any purpose other than the defense of life, liberty, property … Continue reading