Why do some want to punish accomplishment?

Question

Here in the USA we have one party wanting to let tax cuts expire and raise certain taxes that show you may have worked a lot harder than others. I would venture to guess that the people in this group that are looking at higher taxes may be the ones who have spent quite a bit of time in school and made their own way in this world. In the workplace, aren't the people who are getting the biggest raises the ones who are being the most productive and the ones that are working the smartest and getting the most accomplished. Why is good hard work a bad thing?

Answer 1

Sadly, we have to force people to have a positive contribution to society.  If human nature were different, then such measures wouldn't be necessary.

Answer 2

Hard work is not a bad thing. There are tens of millions of Americans who work hard everyday - sometimes at one or two minimum-wage jobs - to support themselves and their families, pay their fair share of taxes, and try to live decent, respectable lives. Let's call them the 'A' families.

There are also tens of millions of Americans who work hard everyday at much higher-paying jobs and support their families, pay what they consider to be their fair share of taxes, and try to live decent, respectable lives. Let's call them the 'B' families.

Then there are the ultra-rich who believe they've worked hard, pay what they consider to be more than their fair share of taxes, and try to live decent, respectable lives. Let's call them the 'C' families.

There are always some 'A' families who take advantage of the social welfare programs, either can't (or choose not  to) work hard, and pretty much live on the 'dole' of government hand-outs and 'entitlements'.

There are always some 'B' families who are proud of what they've accomplished in their lives, and believe they are 'entitled' to low-cost government-funded college loans for their kids, mortgage interest deductions, and a Social Security check when they retire, all courtesy of the U.S. government.

Finally, there are some 'C' families who have acquired the power to demand government 'entitlements' (such as tax deductions for their 'expenses'; tax abatements for their businesses; government bail-outs when their corporations fail, and other corporate welfare programs designed to benefit the wealthy elitists, industrialists, oil barons and power brokers in this nation who want to become even wealthier and more powerful). They don't feel they should have to pay taxes like the 'little people' do, and they have the money to bribe their Congressmen, hire lobbyists or form special interest groups to minimize those things which cut into their profits. After all, they're 'entitled' to suck off the governmet's teat.

This social tier-level is unbalanced and unfair as the rich (who have accomplished much) can continue to use their money to manipulate, intimidate, exploit or dominate the 'A' families by paying consistently low wages; maintain a stranglehold on 'B' families through modest pay increases or nominal promotions over the years and demand favors from government officials and bureaucracies just because they have the power and resources with which to do it.

Hard work is not a bad thing.

Just don't allow yourself to be blinded by the fact that hard work was not the ONLY thing that made the 'C' families more accomplished: in many cases, there was generations of family wealth behind their success or a history of good luck, intimidation, and greed that brought them to their status in life. Why wouldn't it be natural to assume that those who 'have' the most should be obliged - and feel fortunate - to 'give' the most back?

It doesn't 'trickle down' that way. Instead, it becomes an "all for one.....ME" attitude of arrogance, ignorance, neglect, sloth and hubris.   -RKO-  07/29/08

Answer 3

Letting the welfare for the rich tax cuts expire has nothing to do with punishing anyone.

Answer 4

Suppose though a person had artistic skill plus the ability to make a personal currency and there was a system based on exchange of it with that of others. Civic Currency designed and minted by citizens. This would make all sucessfull plus have the benefit of the person being able to work but for themself.

Answer 5

Simple:  If you can support yourself, you don't depend on the government for anything.  The same party that wants to let tax cuts expire and raise taxes to confiscatory levels on people who make more than $200K a year are the same people who want to develop more social programs that everyone must participate in that are controlled by -- guess who? -- THE GOVERNMENT.  Look at their voter base and you'll see the biggest portion of that voter base is made up of people who simply sit with their hands out and say "You OWE me!"  How else do you think they get voted back into office every 2, 4, and 6 years?  BOTTOM LINE:  Their ultimate goal is to make every American dependent upon the government, and once that happens they'll have control over the people.  See the hypocrisy?  The same party that screams and whines about rights and civil liberties is the same party who really wants to take those rights and civil liberties away.

P.S.:  Optimist has it 100% WRONG.  Forcing people to "help" the unfortunate or impoverished is not the answer.  Some people are willing to lend a hand, others simply aren't, and some are on the fence.  The best way to get those people who are on the fence "off" and inclined to help out is to give them incentives for doing so -- by doing that you can also get people who would normally not be willing to lend a hand to help.  Yes, human nature is selfish, so you don't go right up against it by FORCING anyone to do anything.  Instead, you make it worth their while.

Answer 6

It's not. Unless you're a Democrat.