Are Americans Pro-Slavery? - W. Williams on Taxes

[jmichna]

Walter Williams... just another nasty neo-con, spouting the party line... I guess.

Are Americans Pro-Slavery?
Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Let's do a thought experiment asking whether Americans are for or against slavery. You might say, "What are you talking about, Williams? We fought a war that cost over 600,000 lives to end slavery!" To get started, we might find a description that captures the essence of slavery. A good working description is: slavery is a set of circumstances whereby one person is forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor.

The average American worker toils from January 1st to the end of April, and has no legal claim to the fruits of his labor for that period. Federal, state and local governments, through the tax code, take what he produces. A small portion of the fruits of his labor is used to provide for the constitutional functions of government. Most of what's taken, up to two-thirds, is given to some other American in the forms of farm and business subsidies, Social Security, Medicare, welfare and hundreds of other government handout programs. As in slavery, one person is being forcibly used to serve the purposes of another person.

You might ask, "Williams, aren't you a bit off base? Slavery means that you are owned by another person." Who owns a person is not nearly important as who has the rights to use that person. In other words, a plantation owner having the power to force a black to work for him would have been just as well off, and possibly better off, not owning him. Not owning him means not having to bear medical expenses and loss of wealth if the slave died. During World War II, Nazis didn't own Jews, but they had the power to force them to labor for them. Not owning Jews meant that working and starving them to death had little cost to the Nazis. The fact that American slaves were owned, with prices sometimes ranging from $800 to $1,300, meant that owners had a financial stake in the slave's well-being and they were not worked and starved to death.

You might argue that my analogy is irrelevant because unlike American slaves and Nazi concentration camp inmates, we can come and go as we please, live where we want, buy a car, clothes and other things with the money left over after the government gets four months' worth of our earnings. But, does that make much of a difference?

During slavery, visitors to the South often observed "a great many loose negroes about." Officials in Savannah, Mobile and Charleston and other cities complained about "nominal slaves," "virtually free negroes," and "quasi free negroes" who were seemingly oblivious to any law or regulation. Frederick Douglass, a slave, explained this phenomenon when he was employed as a Baltimore ship's caulker: "I was to be allowed all my time; to make bargains for work; to find my own employment, and to collect my own wages; and in return for this liberty, I was … to pay him (Douglass' master) three dollars at the end of each week, and to board and clothe myself, and buy my own caulking tools."

There are some benefits to being a quasi free person such as Frederick Douglass. There are two ways U.S. Congress might force me to serve the purposes of another American. They might force me spend a couple of hours each day actually working, without compensation, for another American. Or, they might forcibly take a portion of my earnings so that American can hire someone. I see myself as being better off with Congress doing the latter -- taking a portion of my earnings and giving it away.
Some might be put off by my thought experiment and consider it an illegitimate use of the term "slavery." At what point should we consider ourselves a quasi free American -- when government takes two-thirds or three-quarters of our earnings?

Observation:
In the second paragraph, Williams notes that 2/3s of what is taken from the "producers" (my term) in this country gets re-distributed... that must mean the remaining 1/3 goes to running the bloated bureaucracy that "manages" the money they seize from the productive segment of society.

"At what point should we consider ourselves a quasi free American -- when government takes two-thirds or three-quarters of our earnings?"
At what point? Hell, I'm not happy now... but when (not if... when) the amount reaches 50.01% then I'm no longer the majority "owner" of myself.

Wealth redistribution:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- K. Marx, 1875

[AZXD]

Wealth redistribution:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- K. Marx, 1875

Ha .... You might as well get really pissed then
Communist Manifesto 10 Planks

[jmichna]

“Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue; or in any manner affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change and can trace its consequences; a harvest reared not by themselves but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow citizens.”
— James Madison

“Federal policies already make food and energy far more expensive than need be... Any new federal scheme to further regulate our energy production would simply make matters worse.”
— Ed Feulner

“Controlling the price of anything is very difficult and it can only be accomplished through the force of government, mostly by restricting supply. The U.S. Congress is a major player in oil supply restriction, and OPEC nations must be laughing all the way to the bank. Congress has banned energy exploration in 85 percent of our coastal waters. Ironically, China, in conjunction with Cuba, is drilling for oil nearer to our coastline than U.S. oil companies are permitted.”
— Walter Williams

“Congress is spending us into a hole. We hear about the cost of earmarks and the Iraq war. But what about ‘entitlements’? That’s the government’s ironic term for programs that transfer money from people who earned it to people who didn’t. Entitlement? How can you be entitled to someone else’s money?”
— John Stossel

“[Obama is] desperately trying to cover up what seems to be the kind of old school Marxist radical liberal failed ideology.”
— Mike Gallagher

“Speaking personally, I don’t want to remake America. I’m an immigrant, and one reason I came here is because most of the rest of the Western world remade itself along the lines Sen. Obama has in mind. This is pretty much the end of the line for me. If he remakes America, there’s nowhere for me to go—although presumably once he’s lowered sea levels around the planet there should be a few new atolls popping up here and there.”
— Mark Steyn

[Brickboy240]

As usual...Dr. Williams is right. The man is wise beyond his years...I wish I had an economics professor like him when I was in college. His students were very fortunate to have had him as a prof.

Still, there are many on the left that swear that you and I are STILL not paying enough. They'll consider you and I winners of life's lottery and see absolutely nothing immoral about taking what you and I worked hard for and giving it to those that can't or won't work as hard. They'd do it without blinking an eye...and believe they were noble for doing so.

There are even more that hoot and holler and cheer on Obama's plans to punish big oil or instill price controls or a windfall profit tax on the oil industry. As if any of Obamas plas would actually give these fools lower gas prices (which is really what they want). They are oblivious to the fact that in ALl the cases where these collectivist ideal were tried, they failed mierably. They think that SOMEHOW this bozo is going to get it all right.

There are many in this country that have no idea how much of their income goes to taxation, nor do they know what even half of the taken monies were spent on. Most cannot point to a single thing their tax dollars went into. Many are clueless to the billions that are basically given to foreign countries that either hate us or have no plans to pay it back.

At one end, govt. loves big business and at the other, they tie its hands to suit their voting base. At times, govt. leaves business and the free market alone to do its work then at other times, govt sticks its nose in and hinders the process.

Then, when things go sideways (like right now...with food and gas prices and the falling dollar) govt. points a finger at business and takes no blame. Its as if govt is never to blame....it is always big business and the free markets running amok that supposedly cause all the ripples in the pond.

Well, its time to end the disinfornation campaign put forth by a neo-socialist Democrat Party in conjunction with a supporting leftist media. Continuing to believe the lies, half truths and idealolgy driven notions will do nothing but send us further down the proverbial tubes.

And its not as if the Republicans have all the answers, either. There are many DC insiders with "R"s after their names that are just as clueless or misinformed and would send us down the socialist river as fast as most Democrats.

To find the truth behind what is causing the problems and the solutions...one will have to look past the rhetoric and research it for themselves. Left up to the two parties and big media...one will never get the truth on what ails us.

- brickboy240

[LUVMYSIGP225]

Originally Posted by AZXD

Wealth redistribution:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"
- K. Marx, 1875

Ha .... You might as well get really pissed then
Communist Manifesto 10 Planks

I always liked Vladimir Lenin's First principle of socialism....

"He who does not work, neither shall he eat."

There are a few million people in this country that need to be introduced to the concept.

[AZXD]

Originally Posted by LUVMYSIGP225

I always liked Vladimir Lenin's First principle of socialism....

"He who does not work, neither shall he eat."

There are a few million people in this country that need to be introduced to the concept.

[DanTheEldest]

Originally Posted by LUVMYSIGP225

I always liked Vladimir Lenin's First principle of socialism....

"He who does not work, neither shall he eat."

There are a few million people in this country that need to be introduced to the concept.

Point taken, but there were plenty of folks under Lenin's rule who worked, but still didn't eat.