Ten days from now is the presidential election. So from now until then I will list my top 10 reasons for voting for Barack Obama.
Number 10
Barack Obama is an inspirational Leader. He leads and people follow. He has the largest grass roots campaign in our nation's history. He has broken all kinds of records for fundraising, without taking a dime from PAC's, lobbyists, or the government. People from all different backgrounds believe that he is the man that can finally lead our country in a new, more stable direction after the failed domestic and foreign policies of the past 8 years. He has assembled a coalition that has broken down barriers - racial, economic, social, educational, ideological - all of them have come tumbling down.
People write Obama off as all fluff, a good speaker with nothing to back it up. But even the most casual perusal of his website (linked to the right) will dispel that falsehood in a moment. His policies are realistic and they reverse the trend of making the rich richer and forgetting about the poor. People talk about "spreading the wealth around" like it is a bad thing!!??!! For me, as a Christian, it's all about giving my neighbor my shirt when all they ask for is my coat and walking the extra mile with those in need. If I have it, I want to share it, I don't want to hoard it. I have no problem with people making over a quarter of a million dollars a year paying higher taxes. Did you read that? A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS. Yes it is a liberal economic policy, I'm good with that. In 1960 JFK said the following:
What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then ... we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal." [September 14, 1960]
I'm proud too.
3 comments:
I'm not entirely opposed to the Robin Hood tax system. However, there is a big difference between willingly sharing your money with those in need, and being forced to give your money to the government. I enjoy giving my money to worthy causes. There are a lot of government programs that I don't think are worthy causes.
If that is your definition of Liberal, then count me in!
However, I do have a problem with the way you would "spread the wealth around." Spreading the wealth is a good thing if you give to others voluntarily, out of the resources that have been entrusted to you, as God leads and in a way that will do others good, not harm.
If someone breaks into you house and steals from you, this is not a good way to spread the wealth, even if he subsequently uses the money for a good cause. If you give money indiscriminately to a teenage smoker whose habit is one pack a day rather than three only because of lack of funds, your good intentions do not nullify the harm you do her. It matters a great deal what form "spreading the wealth" takes.
It is one thing, and a good thing, for you to share your resources with others. It is quite another for you to force someone else to share his. And unless you, yourself, are making more than $250,000 annually, the tax increase you support would be "helping the poor" solely with someone else's money. That does not make you either generous or liberal.
I am not against taxes. As I used to say when people complained of high taxes, "Someone has to pay for the snow plows." I haven't come up with an equivalent since moving south...maybe someone has to pay for the generators that power the street lights after the hurricanes come through. :) But there are at least two very complicated issues in play here. One is determining which functions are better accomplished privately, and which are better done by the government (and within that category, at which level of government). The other is recognizing that we are not dealing with a linear equation when speaking of taxation, realizing that there are ways of increasing taxes that actually result in less revenue -- not only less tax revenue to the government, but less real good done for the impoverished people you hope to assist.
It is not enough to intend good; what we accomplish, and the means we use to pursue those accomplisments, must actually be good. And that is why government, politics, and life are so complicated.
Love both of your comments! I agree that there is a vast difference in giving your money willingly rather than being taxed. I guess what I'm getting at here is that the tax system we have now is fundamentally unfair to the working poor, and it needs to be changed. If that means taxing the wealthy at a higher rate then I'm perfectly fine with that. I do think that they should pay higher taxes.
God tells us that to whom much is given much is required...and I see that all of the time in different ways - but I do think it applies economically and not just how WE want it to. Unfortunately not enough people are going to give willingly to help the poor because of so many radically wrong stereotypes that exist about the poor, so the government has to be involved. And if you have been blessed with a large income then you will be blessed to pay higher taxes! :)
I said in another blog that I wish so much that church hadn't fallen down on the job of caring for the people closest to God's heart but we have. Ideally the government's role in this problem would be very small but it can't be at this time becasue nobody else is stepping up. Especially in this ecomonic climate, I can almost guarantee that churches will slash their budgets in helping programs first...maybe I sound cynical, been working for the church for too long!!!
Post a Comment