Why Aren’t Democrats on the Defensive About Tax Increases?

I’m confused. All I hear is that President Trump’s proposed tax bill includes “tax cuts for the rich”, as if tax cuts, especially for the rich, are automatically always bad and immoral.

If tax cuts are automatically always bad and immoral, then tax increases are supposedly always good. During Obama’s terms of office, we increased taxes. We “spread the wealth around”, as Obama always promised, on the premise that income would become more equal. At the end of these eight years, income was less equal than ever, we were told, which is why Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton ran on the Karl Marx platform, to somehow right the wrongs of Obama’s “capitalism”.

So if Obama’s policies were supposed to lead to greater income equality and did just the opposite, then why aren’t Democrats on the defensive now that Republicans seek to reverse course, even a little? No answer. Because the media is so overwhelmingly biased, dishonest and non-objective that you will never, ever see it happen.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t think government’s job is to spread the wealth around, nor to make incomes equal. Nothing in the Constitution requires that, and with good reason: It’s totally at odds with individual rights, property rights and the Bill of Rights for a free society.

Government should not be making incomes either more or less equal. That’s up to free individuals in the marketplace to decide, based upon always evolving circumstances and choices. In reality, that’s what happens anyway, in some form (however distorted or perverted), whether government intervenes in the marketplace or not.

Probably the only way to get the total income equality that people like Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders claim to want would be to take everyone’s money away and distribute the exact same amount to everyone. That would be income equality right there. Sure, there would be zero incentive to innovate or work hard, and the economy would be an impoverished wasteland. But at least we’d all be equal.

Yet if we reverted to an impoverished wasteland, then people like Obama, Hillary, Bernie Sanders and their cronies in Hollywood, academia and the government-run corporate world would not have all the material comforts they enjoy. They love wealth and comforts for themselves and those whom they love or like. It’s people in general they want to see poor. That’s their dilemma, and that’s the source of their hypocrisy — not to mention their moral depravity and psychological sickness. They want wealth and comfort. But they want to be seen as advocating income equality. Doing so makes them feel morally superior. That’s what irrational and wrong people always do. They only feel right by making it look like others are wrong. Because they cannot prove they are right.

And so the band plays on. Even President Trump sounds defensive when he insists the middle class or the poor benefit as much or more from his tax cuts as the rich. But so what? Tax cuts that largely benefit the rich mean that the rich had much more money taken away in the first place. So naturally they’re getting back more on any rare occasion the government cuts taxes.

Reducing theft actually is better for everyone, because even the least intelligent rich, on their worst day, do a better job than the immoral and unaccountable hacks in both parties who run the whole sinister, Mafia-like operation known as Washington D.C.

Listen to tons of BRAND NEW podcasts HERE! Just Posted!

Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1