[TheRealThing]

He may pay more than my whole county. But more doesn't equal fair.
I never said Bezos didn't pay taxes. I commented on how little a dollar means to him in relationship to us common folk. For him to pay a rate of taxes that is similar to middle class Americans is absurd, and for Amazon to get the corporate to zero is ludicrous.

Washing the argument with hard work hero worship doesn't nullify the issue. The past two tax cuts have allowed the rich to get richer while the middle class is still stuck spinning their wheels. Bezos is one of those guys that has benefited and has taken full advantage of the system. Can't blame him for that, but you can blame those who have allowed the shortfalls in funding to help themselves, or their rich friends.

Of those relative few Americans who do earn money in this land, the top 1% pay 43.6% of all taxes collected. Backdrop that against the 45% of able bodied Americans who pay no taxes at all. Many of those Americans get a freebie yearly bonanza in the form of large unearned tax refunds courtesy of other taxpayers.

If you want to be an activist try taking on the real problem here. Liberals have basically been successful in equating a life of sloth and or lack of motivation, with self sufficient folk's lifetime of paying their own way. In fact, the US Constitution guarantees all men equality of opportunity here in this land. But in turning that ideal on it's head, liberals say all men have the right to be happy, even those who don't particularly make an effort to provide for themselves or their family. We have the 'right to pursue happiness.' Not expect to have happiness handed to us thru the various forms of welfare.

The net affect of all the revisionist blather, has been to redefine the true nature of the US entitlement structure. For example, if I work for my entire lifetime and I pay into, or my employer pays into as part of my earnings package, a personal retirement plan; that constitutes an entitlement (under legal contract) from which I may draw after retirement. Same for Social Security. I pay SS taxes my whole working life and as the result, am promised by the same government which withdrew those weekly taxes, that I will be paid a certain amount after I am old and unable to work. I am entitled to that money because I helped to provide it.

Along comes the liberal and tries to say those who don't work, or haven't worked much, are due entitlements as well. They're needy. And the checks, relatively commensurate to the checks of those who worked for their whole life, roll in. Put another way. One guy got up everyday, rain or shine, cold and heat, day or night, and faithfully went to work. Providing for his family, he pressed on diligently day after day, year after year until time took his ability to continue in the work place away. On the opposite end of the spectrum, another guy doesn't get up, isn't particularly motivated to be successful and expects to live off of the gifts of others. The truth is there is a vast difference between entitlements and welfare. But or course, once liberals redefine them they become the same thing. As a matter of fact, older people who should be being honored are actually scorned as having become a drain on US economy, while the young and the listless are given the place of honor. Even to the point where it is they who deserve perpetual assistance.

Bottom line--- Old people who knocked themselves out to make their own way in this world, find themselves at the end of their lives now mind you. Paying to provide food, housing, healthcare, cell phones and you name it, to able bodied youth. Added to this incredible injustice was Barack Obama's dismantling of their own personal healthcare in the adoption of the ACA. At the very time when old folks find themselves facing the most severe challenges in this life, they are forced to pay for the healthcare of the young. While in many cases a steady stream of big bucks go out the door for healthcare coverage and many procedures are not even covered. When co-pays and out of pocket costs are considered, not to mention drug costs they realize that some conditions will just have to be endured. And even then it's largely a choice between care and keeping a roof over their heads. All of this with their own mortality looming large.

There is nothing noble or dear about an existence characterized by want, and as I have pointed out repeatedly here on this forum. God, The Arbitrator of what constitutes morality in this world, has said in clear and concise terms that man is to work. He is to work and he is to be able to eat "in the sweat of his face." The whole argument of helping he poor is based in liberal mischaracterizations. That said, yes we are to help. Churches and charitable organizations should and do abound in this effort. But legislating moral behavior is not the government's purview. And yet every last argument made in this election season's Democrat debates have been completely and only about giving people free stuff. Ascribing nobility to the human condition is nothing more lofty than secular humanism. Which is BTW, man's alternative to Christianity. In any case, it is God Whom provides for this life, not Democrats.