Is perception reality?

Pew Poll finds majority think rich don't pay enough taxes

Sometimes the majority is wrong, unless it really doesn’t want equality before the law but only equality of outcome. It seems the Pew Institute did a public opinion survey that found that a majority of Americans believe that the “rich” do not pay enough taxes. Interesting concept is “enough.”

I wish I had bookmarked the page (but I didn’t and at the moment I am too lazy to go find it) but it was either a General Accounting Office or a Congressional Budget Office report that had a breakdown by income of which group paid how much. It revealed that the US federal income tax was indeed very progressive (if you can pay more you do, as a percentage of your income). Now, if that is true, then whatever happened to equality?

No, perception sometimes is about other things. For the last few years we have had pounded into our brains that equality means everybody gets the same, rather than everyone is treated the same by the government.

Now, I suppose, that if I am not getting enough, then I should be getting more. However, the concept of enough, like the concept of need, is quite elastic, wouldn’t you say?

To put it in plain perspective, when you sit down at the table to eat: Does everyone get exactly the same meal? Is that a requirement? Do you need the same meal as everyone else? Do you think the same portions given to everyone else are enough for you? What if you don’t like one of the foods on your plate? Must you eat all on your plate?

I could go on and on like that but I think I am making my point. Each of us is an individual. Our needs and our wants and what is “enough” are defined by our own perception and not by someone else. Oh, yes, we can be influenced by society and our learned value system, but it still comes down to what we perceive and how we, as individuals, define “enough.”

Now, we can accept that each of is an individual and try to cope with the problems that presents; or we can try to give each person an equal share of the pie. Granted, equal shares seem to be fairer, but are they always truly fairer? Again, our individual perception colors how we view that question. You see if you want to be “fair”, then government – at whatever level you choose – has to treat each individual equally, otherwise it discriminates by some arbitrary standard. Does government do that? Don’t be silly, of course it doesn’t treat people equal. Not if some people pay more than others and others receive more than others.

How do you reconcile this dichotomy? Well, you can ignore it or you can try to justify it. We in this day and age are trying somewhat ineffectively to accomplish the latter. We do that by trying to figure out a system that gives each individual what they need or what they want. I say ineffectively because as always with humans some are “gaming” the system to their own advantage.

The system tries to codify how government can dole out its largess to a very large, and therefore impersonal, population. The question then becomes should government (as representative of society) be responsible for providing for the needs and wants of individuals or should individuals be left responsible for that chore themselves?

Good question. Should the choice of whether to assist others be left to the individual or should it be compelled by the community? It depends, I guess, on how you view property (and I include labor as property). You see if an individual can “own” property, then that creates one set of problems. If all property is “owned” by the community, then that creates another set of problems. The question then becomes which system is “right” and which system meets the needs of the individual best.

Again, that brings us back to the question: Are we individuals? Do individuals have rights? Can individuals be free to make their own choices? Are individuals responsible for those choices? When are individuals not responsible? When is it right for others to take responsibility for individuals?

I firmly believe that as individuals, we are – for the most part – responsible for our own decisions; that we have to take responsibility for our own lives. And having said that: I also believe that we should make the choice to help others when we can; not because we have to or are compelled to do so, but because we choose to do so. I also believe that it is our own self-interest to choose to defend and protect our community and our society. Yes, it is an “obligation” but it not an obligation that you can force a person to accept. It must come from within the person.

I don’t agree with those who say it is right for the government/society to compel anyone to do anything or make a certain choice. They should be free to make whatever choice they want, with the proviso that they also are willing to accept the consequences of that choice, whatever they may be. That means that if they make bad choices, then they have to live with those bad choices. Yes, that means that maybe they will be harmed. Yes, that may mean that others might be harmed by association. We can try, if we choose to ameliorate that harm to the others, but even that should by choice rather than compulsion.

I know I could be very wrong in these beliefs. I know that there are a lot of people who might condemn me for lacking in compassion for these beliefs, but they would be ignoring that I, too, have a choice and that choice is when and where and how I assist others.

So, back to the original thesis of this essay: Do the rich pay enough in taxes? Well, it depends on how much you mean when you say “enough.” We should not be like bank robbers who rob banks only because that is where the money is. If we plan to take money – taxes – from people, then it would seem to me that equity should be the rule and not the exception. By equity, I mean that if we decide that people should pay at a given rate, then that rate should be the same for all people. If we decide that people should pay a certain amount, then that amount should be the same for all people. That is what government owes us: Equality.

If there are those who can’t – for whatever reason – can’t “pay” the fee, then I would hope that it would be the choice of others to help. Not because they are forced to do it, but because they choose to do it.

As for taxes, if they are based on a percentage of income, or wealth or whatever, then that rate should be the same for all persons. I realize that is not a popular concept, but it is the one I believe is most fair to all people. I believe in that case we are all contributors to society and not divided into two groups: Those from whom things are taken and those upon who benefits are bestowed.

When you look at our society, or any society, as we go into the future, keep those thoughts in mind. I hope that you would consider their merits and act accordingly.

In the end, as always, the choice is yours, yours as an individual and no one else’s.