|
A chance to choose ...
Massachusetts, the Moron State Larken Rose Should the state income tax be abolished?
May 15, 2008 - Well, an important question is about to appear as a ballot initiative in the state of Massachusetts. The question to be on the ballot is this: "Are the people of Massachusetts the biggest morons on the planet?" Okay, that's not the exact wording, but that question WILL be answered. The real question is whether the state income tax should be abolished. If the people of Massachusetts answer with a resounding "No, we LIKE being extorted and robbed blind!" then it will be confirmed once and for all that the majority of people in Massachusetts are dumb as stumps (as if the constant re-electing of Ted Kennedy wasn't proof enough). Of course, the control freaks are having hissy fits about the possibility of losing their extortion racket, predicting doom and gloom, and using words like "chaos," "devastating," and "catastrophe." Well yes, it certainly would be a devastating catastrophe for the parasite class, but it would obviously be a huge boon to the people in the state who are actually productive. So the megalomaniacs of Massachusetts have formed the ridiculously named "Coalition for Our Communities," which is trying to convince the rabble that being robbed is GOOD for them. And the idiocy the crooks use in an effort to persuade people is just amazing. For example, the control freaks claim that abolishing the state income tax would (in the words of a recent news story about it) "stem the flow of money to cities and towns." Wow. Are there actually people stupid enough to fall for such utter lunacy? "Golly, if we stop robbing you, we won't be able to give you money!" For the slim majority of folks in Massachusetts who voted AGAINST a similar initiative in the past, I have some news: "government" takes your money, and gives only some of it back. They can't, overall, give back more than they take (duh), and everything they have, they took from you. If someone takes $2 from you, and gives you back $1, you're worse off than if he hadn't taken anything. I apologize if this complex math is beyond what the government-funded schools in Massachusetts teach. And yet the politicians speak as if all goodness comes from them. Just listen to the fear-mongering bunk spewed by Massachusetts Senate President Therese Murray. (If you're capable of thought, have a barf bucket handy.) "When people are being squeezed, when their energy costs are rising, gas costs are going up, food costs are going up, they're going to say, 'That's a good idea. That would be good for me.' But when their child has no school to go to and they can't get out their door to go to work because the street hasn't been plowed in the winter, I think the public would be back here really quick saying, 'Please, fix this.'" So, you see, unless your money goes through the hands of control freaks like Ms. Murray, you stupid peasants couldn't get anything done. You're far too stupid to just PAY for your kid to go to school, or to just PAY to have your roads plowed. No, only if the Nanny State runs the show -- while taking a nice big chunk of your wealth for itself -- will life be able to go on. Are the people of Massachusetts really so stupid that instead of just PAYING for services they want, via voluntary commerce, they will run to the politicians, crying "Boo hoo! Please tax us and then (after you take your cut) YOU decide what our money should be spent on!" We'll know soon enough if they are that stupid.
To state the painfully obvious, the PEOPLE already pay for every government service that exists. Only, instead of just paying for the service, or just paying for what the people actually WANT, they also pay for government bureaucracies, expensive offices, cars and houses for all the politicians, and for the corrupt and inefficient bidding methods that governments ALWAYS engage in when they're handing out the loot they swiped. They have no incentive to get the best deal, because it's not THEIR money they're spending. It's YOURS. Their goal is to see how many favors and how much power and influence they can acquire by throwing your money around. And THAT is why they don't want to give it up. Let's put this on a level that any simpleton can grasp. Somewhere is a guy with a snow plow. You could, by yourself or in conjunction with your neighbors, hire that guy to plow your area. OR you could let a politician take two or three times as much money from you (at least), waste most of it on himself, his buddies, and his bureaucrats, and then HE could use what is left over to hire the SAME guy in the SAME truck to plow your street. Which sounds like a better deal? Last time the people of Massachusetts were given such a choice, the majority (though by a thin margin), answered with, "That second one, because we LIKE being forced to pay a huge, unnecessary overhead, in order to receive an inferior service at a drastically increased price!" It's bad enough when the schemes of greedy politicians are foisted upon you, but when you're given the choice and you CHOOSE to be robbed -- well, it's hard to get any more idiotic than that.
(return to Articles) |
STUMBLE IT!
