Jane Galt nails it in one line:

Matthew Yglesias ably demonstrates why middle America hates blue state folks…

The demonstration occurs here, as Yglesias dances in circles on the head of pin. Absent of logic, endowed with the need to make the outcome fit the profile; Yglesias states that the inheritance tax is essential because it is essential to tax inheritance. Never noticing that the value which is inherited was taxed upon its creation. Never acknowledging that forcing the sale of an inherited property in order to again collect taxes on the property is double taxation. Never considering the macro impact on those tied to the property.

At least not taking notice up front. Though, he belies the falsehood in his entire argument near the end with this sentence:

The government ought, perhaps, to facilitate some kind of lending arrangement so that people who prefer to keep the store and pay the tax down over time out of operating revenues can do so.

How generous.

He reluctantly admits to the over simplicity of his analysis. Conscience will out. In his euphoric knee jerk reaction against anyone who gets ahead in life he must skirt the reality, someone worked hard to make it what it is, and he goes straight to demanding that the next controller perform the same feats in order to secure the progress made. It is not unlike asking a man to rebuild the bridge before he crosses the river. So, by his logic, Matt needs to reinvent the printing press before he next types. And, why shouldn’t he, he did not invent language, or its means of dissemination, he should pay dearly if he is to benefit from its creation. Rubbish.

Wealth comes in many forms, the advantages we inherit from our fathers are gifts earned by those ancestors, and in the earning they were taxed in many ways. Effort, time, ingenuity, and capital are just some of the taxes paid with the intent being to get back greater shares of each with which we can make our lives, and those others of our choosing, better. Success is as much a social entity as it is an economic one. The anti-capitalists, like Yglesias, seek to redistribute the vision and success of the achievers to fulfill a nebulous and unproven directorate which states that a central control over our lives is preferred to allowing us to plan and execute a future for ourselves and our loved ones. These idealists devoid of imagination fail to see the wise nature in a strong independent unit capable of flourishing and propagating for generation after generation of their our accord. (Without the greedy fingers of big brother whittling away an undeserved share. Self reliance is not only its own reward, but a benefit to the larger group as it relieves said group of the burden of charitable support of that number more among the parasitic class.)

Thus, to them, the achiever is selfish. And, to them, the greater virtue is in others giving away their hard earned rewards for use by those unwilling or incapable of mastering life’s primary challenge; self preservation. They, the idealists without imagination, do not understand the fundamental premise of building a stronger society; it happens one building block at a time. And there is no real advantage to dismantling the solid creation of the previous successful builder in order to prop up novice constructions. The greater goal is to see everyone achieve a measure of self reliance, and with that the elimination of the need for central control, (and an end to the siphoning off of the resources it takes to sustain the centrality). This is called efficiency. And it not achieved through redistribution of resources, for it is not a zero sum matter. And creating another level (centrality) of administration creates that many more unproductive members to be supported by the achievers. The pro tax inheritance crowd are arguing that we are better off dismantling the bridge and distrbuting a share of the building blocks to everyone. Inefficient. That requires extra effort to undo the prior achievement, and a redoubling of effort to reassemble the then dismantled but desireable object, and said recreation must be achieved with fewer resources and increased costs than in the original project. Thanks for nothing, to Matt, and his ilk. Forget the inheritance taxes, Matt, explaining away your visionless economic pollution is taxing enough.

Related Posts

• No Related Post