DH takes some exception:
Vox, with this article you remind me of one of the Marx Brothers. Karl, that is. How in the world can you advocate something to increase the already massive tax load on the childless and not mention cutting some of the lard off the gargantuan federal beast, without throwing some of the child bearing welfare sponges off the pork wagon and onto the work place like the rest of us ? Although you identify yourself as a Libertarian,just as liberals are prone to do, I notice that you do not state how high you are willing to raise marginal rates on us childless vermin. 60? 70? 80? 110? At what levels of income ? 30,000 ? 20,000 ? 10,000 ? Have you ever analyzed what the childless pay into keeping up Social Security, Medicare, and the welfare system as opposed to what we take out ? If you have, I do not know how you can claim that we are not helping to perpetuate the bloated federal sow. If you are ever going to take part in a forum with those of us who oppose you, please e-mail me because I want to listen or be part of it.
It never ceases to amaze me how some individuals expect me to directly address all possible ramifications and tangentially related matters in a single 750-word column. And it never ceases to annoy me how these same individuals will, at the same time, completely ignore everything I have ever written before as well as my general political philosophy in indignantly leaping to point out a seeming, but nonexistent contradiction.
There is probably not a single regular here who is under the impression that I favor Social Security, Medicare or the welfare system. Indeed, I have no doubt that even my most vehement critics are well aware that I oppose such things. DH here displays an all-too-typical conflation of tactics and strategy, of specific policy and general philosophy, which I often see exhibited by godless, left-wing evolutionary dead-ends and God-fearing, freedom-loving Constitutional conservatives alike. He should know better.
The point of Monday’s column was not to provide a complete restructuring for the entire federal system of revenues and expenditures from a libertarian perspective, it was to consider ways that governments which already engage in social engineering might do so in a more effective and freedom-enhancing manner. Does DH think he will receive anything from Social Security if the following generations are too few in number to support it? Does he think that in the current American tax model, his taxes will be higher, or lower, if there are significantly fewer taxpayers to shoulder the load with him?
I agree that all parties, childless and parents, are wrongly forced to perpetuate an unjust system. But that is not the matter under discussion here. From a current utilitarian perspective – as opposed to a theoretical libertarian one – the childless have little to contribute except their taxes. Therefore, if society is to perpetuate itself, it should come as no surprise that the financial contributions of the childless will have to be higher, as they contribute less in other ways.
In any case, if one finds the ability of Western society to perpetuate itself to be of no interest or concern, one might as well move to China or Saudi Arabia and get a head start on acculturating oneself to the probable future.
UPDATE: DH considers my response:
Vox, I want to thank you for your graciousness in posting my e-mail to you. First, to put you at ease, I am well aware and appreciate your long term efforts to educate Americans on the unnecessary high taxes we all pay as the result of the government being involved in areas that it should not be. The panic in my e-mail was because I thought that as a result of the Vikings meltdown or some medication that you were taking, that you had suddenly lost it and were drifting over to the other side.While you and I might not agree on the best and most immediate solution to the problem you outlined, your reasoned response lowered my blood pressure to non stroke levels and re-affirmed to me that the real Vox was still there.Also, I enjoyed the posts from your thoughtful readers.
Don’t get me wrong. I may still melt down over Daunte. I like Brad, I have confidence in Brad, I still think that Denny was a cretin for keeping Randall over Brad, but Brad is not Daunte. At this point, I’m still deeply in the denial stage, although it’s not as if the season wasn’t sunk as deeply as… well, let’s just say that one could whip out some unfortunate similes involving Lake Minnetonka.
Okay, what were we talking about?