Zzz.
Bottom line: the lib governing philosophy is that what a person earns is not really something to which that person is necessarily entitled.
For some grunting & inarticulate "reason," many libbies seem to believe (actually believe) that the "whole" of society has a claim to a significant portion of that income that is somehow superior to the claim of the person who earned it.
Now, for things to which we have all agreed in this Republic of LIMITED and ENUMERATED POWER, things like postal service, armed forces, a judicial system, and various Executive Departments whose mandate can fairly be traced to the enumerated powers, the payment of taxes is generally approved (although we might disagree as to the wisdom of the method of collecting such taxes).
But for the libs' often unstated premise, there is no agreement. The libs' often unstated premise is that there exists this allegedly superior right of ALL OF US to a portion of the income the individual earns for the purpose of redistributing that wealth.
And then the libbies seem to have endless difficulty figuring out why there might be perfectly valid, just and reasonable opposition to their notions. A minority earns a significant portion of the income, and pays a disproportionately large share of the taxes, yet when they object to things like redistribution of wealth, the libbies accuse the ones paying the most of being "greedy."
Dishonest motherfuckers. This is another reason the "argument" of libs tends to be so unpersuasive.
Bottom line: the lib governing philosophy is that what a person earns is not really something to which that person is necessarily entitled.
For some grunting & inarticulate "reason," many libbies seem to believe (actually believe) that the "whole" of society has a claim to a significant portion of that income that is somehow superior to the claim of the person who earned it.
Now, for things to which we have all agreed in this Republic of LIMITED and ENUMERATED POWER, things like postal service, armed forces, a judicial system, and various Executive Departments whose mandate can fairly be traced to the enumerated powers, the payment of taxes is generally approved (although we might disagree as to the wisdom of the method of collecting such taxes).
But for the libs' often unstated premise, there is no agreement. The libs' often unstated premise is that there exists this allegedly superior right of ALL OF US to a portion of the income the individual earns for the purpose of redistributing that wealth.
And then the libbies seem to have endless difficulty figuring out why there might be perfectly valid, just and reasonable opposition to their notions. A minority earns a significant portion of the income, and pays a disproportionately large share of the taxes, yet when they object to things like redistribution of wealth, the libbies accuse the ones paying the most of being "greedy."
Dishonest motherfuckers. This is another reason the "argument" of libs tends to be so unpersuasive.