Government Lemonade Stands
As I sit here in my pajama pants, I am a parody of self importance. And yet, I assure you, I possess no authority. There are no Pennyworth Bulls coming down from any College of Cardinals. Or even a College of Bluejays. Nasty things, blue jays.
About that debate last night. As I started that sentence, I felt a cringe in my neck. That might have been the fact that my pillows were a bit under fluffed last night, or it could be that the debate was inconclusive, as debates are wont to be. It was like the negotiation between the Dutch settlers and the natives of Manhattan must have gone. Here, have this wampum. We get the land, right? Sure. You can use the land. We seem to have no common definitions which would allow us to determine who is right and who is wrong. Or even if there are such things as right and wrong.
One thing in particular stuck in my craw. I never say things like that in real life, but somehow it seemed a propos to toss that in here. It’s a throwaway line that many left-leaning (and some right-leaning) politicians use habitually. Here’s the quote, taken from the linked site. It’s a righty site, but I’m sure they were responsible with the quote since politifact is all over that shit.
“Slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn’t worked. And a lot of really wealthy people know that. And they are saying, hey, we need to do more to make the contributions we should be making to rebuild the middle class.” (Hillary Clinton, 09/26/2016: goo.gl/jW9SwV)
Yes, I know that isn’t a standard citation method, but I hope you’ll pardon me.
Sounds pretty banal doesn’t it. Almost as sweet and innocent as standing at the end of a baby line kissing away. Or eating too much pie at the county fair when you’re running for land commissioner.
Two things bother me about this statement, however generic it may seem at face value.
Number one:
This is by far the lesser of the two weevils. The phantom non-source. “I have friends who believe things like this so I’m gonna do something about it.” Richard Gephardt was famous for having ‘rich friends who want me to do the thing I’m doing.” There are other politicians who are not disinclined to using this particular tactic. Translation: straw men can be used both to prop up and to tear down arguments.
Number two:
What bothers me most about this particular quote and the idea behind it, is that rich people need intermediaries to be generous. Maybe they do. But if there is a vast rich population out there who desire to give to the medium class, isn’t it perfectly acceptable for them to do so without the government being involved and taking its cut? Anytime there’s an intermediary hanging onto and distributing money there is a fee, right? Isn’t that how banks make their money? Essentially banks charge you money to keep yours safe and conveniently available. Other than a building and some security cameras, what is the bank really doing for you?
So government is like a bank. To make a very weak analogy, using this argument is like saying that in order to buy lemonade from a kid’s lemonade stand, a group of parents huddles together in a corner complaining that if only they could write a check to the kids they could buy lemonade from them. Each of them reaches into their pocket and finds adequate funds to purchase many glasses of lemonade, or to give generously to the little entrepreneurs as they see fit.
But no one buys lemonade because the kids can’t cash checks and forgot to rent a credit card machine.
I hope you got your penny’s worth. (Bad puns will be plentiful here.)
