Thursday, November 8, 2012

Teaching economic freedom to my posterity

I have never explained anything political to my 1st grade son. However, I've recently noticed that he is quick to exclaim "Dad! There's Obama" anytime he shows up on the news.  At dinner last night I heard a child that looked to be his age at the next table loudly proclaim, "Oh, I voted for Barack Obama!" It's very apparent that my son is learning something about this subject at school, the problem is, I'm not sure it's a lesson I approve of.

He's like his Daddy, and pretty quick with the math, so I guess it's time for a lesson on economics.  So here's my plan.

He has a list of tasks to do, and he gets a "bonus" for his report card.  His payment isn't flat, he actually gets paid for individual activities, so if he accomplishes more, he gets a larger "paycheck". I want him to learn the value of not just "hard work", but more importantly the value of accomplishing something.  

"The Obama Plan"

For his next paycheck, I'm planning on implementing a progressive tax system. I want to make it so, with a decent amount of effort, he can and exceed the highest tax bracket in a pay period.  I'll make the tax reflect a simple version of the system set to take effect in Jan so that he'll pay 39.6% tax in the highest tax bracket.  I will keep things simple, and label this the "Obama Plan".  I want him to put consequences on the face he sees. I want him to understand that the picture they'll showing at his school and clapping about does things to HIM personally.

To keep the numbers simple, and not need to change his current pay scale I'm going to make the brackets like so.

$0-$3 - no taxes
$3-$7 - 10%
$7-$10 - 30%
$10 an up - 40%

This means that if he makes $7 (a pretty normal week), he'll "take home" $4.90. If he makes $10 (he worked extra hard), he'll take home $6, an impressive $1.10 for the extra 5 or 6 tasks he had to do to "earn" the additional $3. He's a pretty bright kid mathematically, and I'd be willing to bet that he'll quickly learn that working for that extra $3 doesn't have the return that working for the original $3 does.

Every payday, before he gets his money, I'll tax his earnings, and I will explain how the politicians decide to do this.  I'll also run through the same gross pay under the other plan I discuss below.

"The Other Plan"

After a few pay periods of the progressive tax system, I'll implement Hermain Cains 9/9/9 plan with him. This is quite a bit simpler, and since I'll have already explained it while he was under the progressive system, he'll probably understand it before he gets to it. I'll tax him 9% at payday, and 9% when he spends it.  This means that he'll get $8.20 of buying power for that $10 he earns on a good week. I'm not yet sure what to label this plan since the Republican party never embraced this plan, only a lower version of the current progressive tax plan, so I'm open to suggestions.

After he's gotten both tax plans, I'm going to ask him which one he prefers. I guess I could really drive the issue home by giving all his tax money the neighborhood kids and let them vote too. However, I can't bring myself to be as oppressive to my son as what we currently live under. I'm also afraid he's smart enough to go galt on me if that happend.

This is gunna kill me, because I'm so proud of the way he runs upstairs to do "chores" and looks forward to "payday". But being a good parent is more than hugs and kisses, it's about teaching life lessons. It'll be a cold day in hell when I let the public school system teach my son their perverted version of morality.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Whimsical world of I wish

Pick up the pieces.

Live in reality, not the whimsical world of “I wish”. We live here, and this is how it IS. What I want, or what I think should be is of no importance in the real world. I wish there were purple unicorns that pooped Free Market ideals too, but there aren’t. So move the heck on.

Stop it with the “impeach”, “traitor”, “muslim”, “God has forsaken us” stuff, since it does NOTHING to solve the problem. It’s just more purple unicorn poop stuff.

Let’s be objective. Let’s state the problem. Once we find the problem, let’s figure out a solution, and work on that.

Let’s not have a cough drop and call the pneumonia all better because the cough is gone.

What’s the problem?

No, I don’t think the problem is that we elected an open redistributor to the White House. I think that’s a cough, a symptom of a much greater disease. Let’s look at that symptom, and deduce the disease. For someone to be elected, he has to get the plurality of the vote. It stands to reason that the plurality of the nation thought that a redistributor was better than the alternative.  They bought the “fair share” argument. They believed that rational self interest, and the profit motive are inherently evil. That librarians and teachers are somehow “better” people than bankers and engineers.

This is the disease, and it’s much more difficult to cure than yelling about the long form of some guys birth certificate, but much more fruitful.

Fight that fight. Yes, it’s a difficult fight. From a young age, they have been taught to accept without question that sacrifice is a good thing, no matter what the reason. Question that logic. Ask them to rationally explain why it’s better for someone to help a bum than to hire a new employee. You’ll get funny looks, but don’t let people divert the conversation. Have them explain the logic. The truth is they can’t. They can’t because there is a flaw in their moral code. Examine that flaw. That flaw is the disease that must be cured to save the nation.

Some food for thought from Ayn Rand...

Tuesday, September 25, 2012

The inflation of liberty

Markets are destroyed by inflation. By arbitrarily injecting currency, we devalue it. This principle also holds true for individual liberties. By arbitrarily defining something that must be produced by someone as the "right" of someone else, we cause the inflation of personal liberty, something much more destructive than any monitory inflation.

Friday, September 21, 2012

The battle of "the right thing to do"

Random Dude wearing a "Level The Playing Field" Shirt: "Goofy is rich! That isn't fair. He didn't even earn his wealth! He should contribute more, and pay his fair share!"

Me: "If he didn't earn it, where did his wealth come from?"

Random Dude: "Not sure, but I think his great grandfather Mickey built an oil well and got rich doing it...There are so many people who have nothing, the weaker among us. We should value their rights!  It's the right thing to do!

How many times have we heard this one?

It's one of the many battle cries of the modern liberal: So many are in need, and there are so many wealthy who didn't "earn" their money. It's just not fair, so the government should make things more fair, to give everyone an equal shot.  Does Goofy deserve all his wealth? Has he earned it? All Goofy does is run around and saying "Gawrsh". He's certainly not a responsible person. He's not too bright either. He'll probably waste all of it on really big shoes.  That money could be spent much more appropriately on those who need it more. We're all in this together. The government should DO SOMETHING, because... because... It's just the right thing to do!

The whole context of this discussion is wrong. 

This argument isn't about the character or worthiness of the person in possession of the wealth. No, this argument is about the rights of the producer of the wealth. It is a basic human right to own property, and to dispose of it how one sees fit. In the above senario, the irony of the statement of the "Random Dude" is laughable, we should value the rights of the "weaker among us"... Who is more weak than a man on his deathbed?

By what right is it morally correct to trample on his right to make the life of his offspring better by appropriating HIS wealth in a way contrary to his whims? By what right is it ok to decide that the producer of wealth's desires have no merit once he is no longer in possession of them?

No, not all those with wealth "deserve" what they have, and many of them certainly haven't "earned" it. That isn't this issue here. Conservatives lose this battle of "what is right" all too often, because they fight on the wrong battlefield.  From the document that formed the government closest to perfection seen by man....

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

My pursuit of happiness it to ensure that my child has a BETTER chance than the next child, to have a better life than I did. By what travesty of morality has it become commonly accepted that this is somehow not "right"?

As Ayn Rand so eloquently put it in "Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal":

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

Call the bluff...