Walter Williams on the Bailout

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

The extent of this sentiment is frequently hard for me to determine. In friendly political debate, a couple of guys I work with - young guys, granted - vigorously assert there should be *no* taxes, at all. None. "It is larceny." Questions about taxes for public education are met with "I don't have kids", questions about roads & infrastructure are met with "I have a truck, dirt roads are fine by me". "People shouldn't have kids until they can pay for their needs, including education". Very, very strong individualistic bias.

If we look at taxation for public education, almost everyone accepts that older generations sharing the child-rearing generation's education cost load is a smart investment for society. But, if we were to look at that debate when it occurred, who thinks it would be much different than the healthcare debate of today? How many libertarians think education is a "right"? For that matter, isn't taxation for education part of the creeping governmental dominance Williams refers to?

There is a degree of individualism on the right that I can't quite relate to. I see from folks (whom I respect) with basic perspectives along the lines of "why am I expected to care for others, everyone should take care of themselves". It is the classic dichotomy between individual & group. An LDS derivative is based on the family... "I take care of my family & want government to leave us alone. We're all better off if families fend for themselves." Or Reagan's dreaded 11 words. "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you". Government *is* the problem.

The family of my son's friend are very wealthy - multiple houses of 20,000 sq ft or more. For example, my son & a couple of other friends are paid each holiday season to erect 19 (nineteen) Christmas trees throughout the Bountiful home. The father rails incessantly about taxes, the unfairness of the wealthy having to pay so much of the total tax load, etc. I honestly believe this man would be fine if he paid the mean tax. He earned his money, why should he have to pay more than the average? (His construction company also recently filed for bankruptcy - not sure how many of the homes he may have to give up. If he has good accountants, maybe none of them.)

As for the spectrum of opinion on how much government should be involved in the economy, I'm on the other side of the aisle, admittedly. For example, having worked in private health insurance, I can tell you the American public is being driven to the bank on a daily basis by private interests - and many redundant private bureaucracies - but this is apparently far more preferably than government sponsored health insurance, money or quality of coverage be damned.

Thus my hyperbolic question was not intended as literal, per se, but from my perspective it's pretty close, as near as I can tell, for many on the far right.

I think these guys you talk to are not the norm in the right wing. I'm considered a far right-winger by many and I don't agree there should be no taxes. Taxes in and of themselves are not larceny, it's the purpose behind those taxes that are the problem. I'm very much for government: a strong, but limited government, as laid out by the constitution.