Re: Liberals: Defend capital gains taxes

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 13:53:58 -0500, Chris Bellomy wrote...

> No, my point is that government, properly conceived, is the
> instrument of the common good, and not an entity with financial
> self-interest beyond achieving its mandate as dictated by the
> voters.

Umm.. duh?

> Now, you may fairly respond that government often is executed
> to line the pockets of the corrupt, which is obviously true.

I suppose, but not all waste (or even most of it, I think) has to do 
with corruption.  I think it has more to do with the idea that the money 
is the government's, as opposed to the taxpayers'. 

> My counterpoint is that the moment we start crafting law that
> assumes government to be a corrupt actor, the corruption becomes
> absolutely endemic to the institution and the American experiment
> fails. At some point, we have to assume that we *can* create a
> government that comes pretty close to doing the right thing,
> even if the current iteration doesn't.

Correcting the taxation problem in the United States isn't crafting laws 
which assumes the government is corrupt.  It's crafting laws which seek 
to prevent the op****tunities for money to be wasted.

I would also like to point out that your argument is a bit of a red 
herring, in that there are quite a few laws which not only allow for but 
practically count on a certain amount of governmental corruption.  There 
are entire sections of the U.S. Code which provide means for redress in 
the face of corruption, waste, fraud, etc.  Hell, the highest law in the 
land specifically mentions that the citizenry has a right to "chrow de 
bums out!" if the government goes too far to the bad. (not that a 
Revolution is really possible anymore, but anyway...)

-- 
E.F. Hokie

<insert witty or profound quote here>