America

Why do people believe that Republicans are all ‘rich’ and that they have a ‘War on the poor and middle class’?

Granted, the Republican party have their fair share (and maybe more than their fair share) of rich people, but the title of ‘rich’ can hardly be reserved for members of the Republican party.

I won’t name names, but it doesn’t take much research to find that the list of Democrats who can be classified as ‘rich people’ is quite an extensive list indeed.

Still, Republicans, regardless of their wealth, are more often than not, cast not just as ‘rich’, but ‘evil rich’. Mind you, the addition of the word ‘evil’ has little to do with the size of their bankroll, and a lot more to do with how they want to horde it.

There seems to be a general consensus that Republicans want nothing more than to make the rich richer, and the poor poorer.

I would try to delve into that even further, but the truth of the matter is, I’ve written the entire idea off as pure demagoguery and could hardly debate it without breaking the only two rules of this blog.

So I want to invite you to look at it from a different perspective…

I’ll start off by making a few assumptions (each of which I’m sure will be debated hotly if anyone ever reads this post).

1. Republicans, in general, are for lower taxes and smaller government
2. Democrats, in general, are in favor of more government oversight and using more of the available tax dollars (notice I didn’t say higher taxes) to help those who they see as needing the help the most

Let’s start by analyzing the first assumption a little:

If it’s true that Republicans, in general, want lower taxes and smaller government, then ask yourself: Why?

The only reason I can come up with for the argument of lower taxes is that they, Republicans, feel that they pay a lot of taxes, and get very little in return for the money that they are spending.

It’s true, to an extent. Take for example the breakdown of how tax dollars are spent provided by the White House for 2014 tax revenue: Your 2014 Taxpayer Receipt.

1. 23.58% of your tax dollars are spent on Medicaid and Medicare programs.
2. 12.69% of your tax dollars are spent on Food Stamps, Earned Income Credit, Housing subsidies, Child Care subsidies and temporary assistance for needy families
3. 9.07% on Interest – INTEREST on loans that the government has taken to support more spending
4. 3.42% on ‘Additional Government Programs’

That’s 48.56% of their tax dollars being spent on programs that they, very likely, are not getting much of a return on.

They claim that, lower taxes and lower government spending puts the money back into the hands of the people who create jobs in this country. (Another comment that will surely spark some debate)

As for smaller government, well, that’s easy. Whether or not you buy into the ‘evil rich people’ ideology, it’s hard to argue with people who believe smaller government = less oversight = more corner cutting = saving more money. Though, as a small business owner, I don’t actually believe that every company is out to screw their consumers with substandard product.

It’s easy to see how those ‘evil rich people’ could, and undoubtedly do lobby for smaller government so that they can save some money. But again, a little bit of research can show how members of both parties ‘work’ with businesses to reduce government oversight when it is mutually beneficial to them. Typically in the form of kickbacks and campaign contributions I’m sure.

I think we can all agree – I’ve laid out a good argument why the Republicans can be subcategorized ‘evil rich’ and not just by ‘rich’ alone.

So what motivates the Democrats to fight the good fight? These compassionate, caring, do-gooders whose only purpose in life is to; defend the defenseless, help the helpless and stand tall for all of humanity – except for those ‘evil rich people’ of course.

Who could possibly find fault in their selfless giving?

The very fact that they donate all of their time, energy and money to the cause is evident by the fact that they are all poor people themselves. I know, I know. They’re not ALL poor. Hell, some of them may even have more money than some of those ‘evil rich people’. For God’s sake, considering all that they do for us, I would think that the very least we can do is allow them to make a living wage. And perhaps have a little bit in savings. Or in some cases, a lot.

Nevertheless, they are do-gooders. Right?

They fight for poor people. Right?

They have no motivation to keep poor people poor. Right?

The fact of the matter is, if more people in this country were ‘rich’, then more people would pay taxes. And if more people paid taxes, more people would care about how those tax dollars are being spent. I dare say, if more people paid taxes, then fewer people would need assistance and we could reduce the amount of money that we spend on public assistance.

But, if we increased the number of people contributing to the tax coffers. If we reduced the number of people in need of government assistance. If we had more ‘rich’ people…

In fact, if every poor person in this country suddenly became rich tomorrow, what would these selfless givers have to fight for?

In summary, I think it’s true that Republicans want to keep more of their money as opposed to ‘investing’ in government programs that they get very little, or no return on. I think it’s true that Republicans hate that there are so many poor people in this country. I think it’s true that Republicans (and Democrats) take kickbacks and campaign contributions for people and companies who they give special favors to in their official capacity.

I also think it’s true that the Republicans gain absolutely nothing by keeping the poor poor. Or worse yet, making them poorer.

I think it’s true that if we just get one poor person off of public assistance, that we reduce the amount of money needed for public assistance programs – which in turn reduces the amount of money that those ‘evil rich people’ have to pay toward programs that they receive no benefit from. And if you expand that out, the more poor people who become less poor, the less money that Republicans and Democrats alike have to spend on supporting poor people.

On the contrary, while Republicans risk giving up even more of their money when the poor get poorer, the Democrats risk very little.

As long as there are helpless, defenseless, starving people in the world, the Democrats can continue to justify their highly lucrative positions (let’s face it, it goes well beyond salary) in our government and society. As long as there are people who NEED the government to help them with their bare necessities, there will be a need for Democrats to selflessly give them other peoples money.

So which do you prefer? As it sits, I think there is a need for both. As long as there are poor people who can’t afford to feed and house themselves, we will need government programs to help them. But my vote and my money will always go to the people have a real reason to solve the problems as opposed to those who stand to lose everything if the problems are resolved.

If you’ve gotten to this point, there is no turning back. You’ve invested a good amount of time reading my rantings. Why not share your thoughts and add to it?