Using the Tax State as a Weapon against Our Humanity. #Individualism #ChildPoverty #Taxation #GreenParty #RichPricks

 

Metiria and Green co-leader Russel Norman will illogically spend $400 million on paying the In-Work child credit for children born of parent(s) not ‘in work’. Logically this can only result in babies that otherwise wouldn’t be born, being born into homes that are living wholly on benefits. Such babies will automatically fall into that statistical category of children living in poverty, by dint of there being no ‘income other than a benefit’ coming into the homes they live. So, employ this policy, as ill-conceived as unfortunately the children will be, and despite we already have one child in five born into a house reliant on a benefit, then it is absolutely guaranteed when you run the child poverty stats in five years, ten years, a generation, the number of children living in poverty will have risen. It has to. When that happens, the Left will say this is awful, and demand of us yet bigger and bigger doses of collective responsibility – which will ultimately have  destroyed individual responsibility completely –  and insist we spend more upon more to stop child poverty, so moving tax rates up to 50%, to 60%, to 75%. Repeat cycle over and over.

 

Although this post is about something more sinister...

 

Note particularly the first and last tweets in the following, then my links that follow to what the Free World once was, but now destroyed under the oppression of a massive, pervasive tax surveillance state that strips us of our identities, our humanity, our property, and so of our classical liberal birth right: liberty.

 

Good thing we can tackle child poverty by only the top 3% of wealthiest NZers paying a little more tax #LoveNZ http://t.co/afuy3L3U0I
— Metiria Turei (@metiria) September 5, 2014

 

Metiria seems to be appearing in this blog a lot lately, or rather, naturally, given the Green Party's coercive ethic is the antithesis of the free, voluntary society I care about (to appropriate the Green Party slogan). Conveniently forgetting, as the Green Party doesn’t, that the top 19% of taxpayers already pay 86% of the personal income tax take, and after net transfers families earning below $60,000 pay nothing, it remains more troubling how Metiria so glibly performs the necessary dehumanisation involved in the persecution being enacted here. This 3% are merely rich pricks – so called by a former Labour Finance Minister - whom in the wrong headed Left world view are the scape goats cause of the poor - they're not - and whose very humanity is thus denied them; rich pricks are not individuals filled with goals and aspirations from the wealth they have created; the state can ignore the circumstances of their wealth, the risk taking and sleepless nights they’ve had, many of them in their early business years risking everything on each transaction they took; and finally in Metiria’s tweet, the state can ignore the fact a rich prick's personal belief born of experience, not electioneering, may well be that their money used to grow the welfare state will make poverty worse, not better, and they could use their wealth to make people independent of the state rather than dependent on it, simply by reinvesting in the choices, opportunities and value from competition in the free economy, or for many wealthy philanthropists, private, targeted, charity. It's the unfounded arrogance of the Left politick that Metiria believes she knows better than these rich pricks do, whom through the enactment of corrupt law are made her personal bank, their effort to be confiscated from the lolly shop of their wallets and doled out to  her voting base. And don’t think this stops at the 3%. We have a regressive progressive tax system, the Green Party, and Labour, will be using that progressivity down all the income bands to extract more tax from all of us who work and strive to better our lot, and the aspirations we have for our families, just as they will impose a capital gains tax to fleece us of the savings on which we've already paid tax once: if you’re reading this post and are a net taxpayer, or own investments saved for retirement, be warned, you’re a rich prick, and it's a lot more than a little tax the Green and Labour parties will be asking you for (and that’s before we get onto carbon and water taxes which ultimately are borne by the consumer).

 

Don’t misunderstand me, for I understand many people like Metiria are not evil people, indeed, they’re good people; I understand and respect their individuality in a way they will never respect mine, the taxpayer’s, or the 3%. In fact, Metiria would probably scratch her head wondering why I am so scathing in the above paragraph and be feeling a bit miffed, as I don’t think she understands, circa 2014 and so far down the road to our serfdom, how offensive all the assumptions in her tweet are. Like every tyranny in modern history that starts out with the best of intentions, the Left, especially, and I include the National Party in that, perpetrate evil in the theft of what is not theirs to take, and the police state powers of surveillance and forceful intrusion into a life legislated to the taxing authority ensuring it's carried out; and they perpetrate evil in the use of this stolen property to widen and deepen a cruel dependence to the welfare state of the very people they think they’re helping up, but are not because they don't have the mind to deal with causes. Finally, understand that unfortunately for those on the Left who are not kind hearted, unlike Metiria, and there's a preponderance of them, the well-spring of their ethic is ugly; an ugliness never far from the surface, as this very thread so soon portrayed.

 

@metiria That is so wrong on every level of principle and practice, Metiria. But part of the course circ 21st century.
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) September 5, 2014

@MarkHubbard33 @metiria I'm in the top tax bracket and happy to pay more (I've voted Greens); long term, wealth not income shld be taxed.
— Harriet (@HarrietSpy2) September 5, 2014

@HarrietSpy2 U can't assume my property is yours 2 dispose. Argue on link y Green policy won't incr poverty http://t.co/oGCuWGOvbo @metiria
— Mark Hubbard (@MarkHubbard33) September 5, 2014

@MarkHubbard33 @metiria salut. voting is the tyranny of the majority so if my majority wins, your property is the people's to tax.
— Harriet (@HarrietSpy2) September 5, 2014

 

Hattip to NotPC for this salutary reminder:

 

 

 

Noting that to tax is to take, comrade Harriet’s end tweet is repugnant; the bared teeth of unprincipled malice glistening in its overt threat:  this is the compassionless, vindictive machine of state waiting to eat those of us who think differently, and grok from history the evil of a big brother state and dare to challenge it. Remember Harriet's is finally the Truth that lies behind every principle and action of the Left and statists of all hues: the brute force of the tax surveillance state, and the rendering of every individual privateless and powerless before it. I’ve written on it before when Chris Trotter took his cultivated, urbane mask off, to show the same ugly malice within, wishing on rich pricks that the ‘IRD would squeeze them until their pips squeaked.’ When I pointed this tweet out later to Metiria, Harriet said I’d taken her out of context: no, as with here, I’ve simply put her into context, that being the context of our modern history.

 

Pure and simple Metiria's tweet is persecution of the most vile type, and for many of the Left conducted with a cold-hearted spite, and in others, good people like Metiria, from an ignorance born of an arrogance the Left have, unmindful of consequences thinking themselves morally superior in their compassion with my money.

 

Bullshit.

 

The Green policy of throwing $1 billion at child poverty, can only grow child poverty, and with it the brass knuckles of the tax surveillance state required to fund it. Everyone loses. Look at it again: Metiria and Green co-leader Russel Norman will illogically spend $400 million on paying the In-Work child credit for children born of parent(s) not ‘in work’. Logically this can only result in babies that otherwise wouldn’t be born, being born into homes that are living wholly on benefits. Such babies will automatically fall into that statistical category of children living in poverty, by dint of there being no ‘income other than a benefit’ coming into the homes they live. So, employ this policy, as ill-conceived as unfortunately the children will be, and despite we already have one child in five born into a house reliant on a benefit, then it is absolutely guaranteed when you run the child poverty stats in five years, ten years, a generation, the number of children living in poverty will have risen. It has to. When that happens, the Left will say this is awful, and demand of us yet bigger and bigger doses of collective responsibility – which will ultimately have  destroyed individual responsibility completely –  and insist we spend more upon more to stop child poverty, so moving tax rates up to 50%, to 60%, to 75%. Repeat cycle over and over; get those IRD auditors jack booted up and inveigled into taxpayers homes, offices, families and lives. It's notable that when I put this argument on twitter I was accused - not by Metitia - of beneficiary bashing, and told ‘all children are precious’: to which I respond grow up and start thinking; yes all children are precious, when born, but un-conceived children don’t exist. The same respondent also went ugly, indeed called Metiria into the thread, when I pressed her to the question of where does an individual and their partner's responsibility to have a child in prudent circumstances end, and the taxpayer's victimisation in being forced to pick up the tab for their lifestyle choice begin.

Finally, one heartening statistic from a National MP who is having an effect; that Minister reviled by the Left, Paula Bennett. As reported by Lindsay Mitchell, even with her moderate toughening of welfare provision, under her tutelage the trend of teenage pregnancy and 16 to 17 year old solo parents on a benefit, across all ethnicities, has plummeted: that is how to combat and abolish child poverty. A Labour/Green government would destroy the gains made here, and soon have this age group back on the teat of state.

 

 Bye the bye, I invited Metiria to debate Green’s child poverty policy with me in the comments of my last post, but there was, rather than a failure of nerve, to give Metiria the benefit of the doubt, I’m assuming a failure of time, after all this is election year:

 

@MarkHubbard33 @peter_alchemy Nope.
— Metiria Turei (@metiria) September 6, 2014

 

But I’m all for equal opportunity, so regarding this post, I’ll give Metiria, or Russel, the chance to respond to a challenge I made of every politician long ago, and to which none have accepted, to explain to me what a fair tax is please?

 

 

Further reading:

 

What the Free West stood for, before it was destroyed by the Liberal Left; the small, free state, and limited government - what the ANZAC’s were fighting for.

 

The limited instance that tax was meant to be on its inception. (Telegraph).

 

Why Green’s Child Poverty policy will not tackle child poverty, indeed, will create greater child poverty.

 

 

Footnote:

 

My earlier post on race relations and for Maori self-determination is being discussed in the Right wing blogs: good. You can see me in the comments of this piece. I don’t seem to be winning any converts, and possibly throwing myself from some parts of the Libertarian canon (I hope not, because if we can’t encompass different viewpoints, then we’ve sunk below our own classical liberalism.)

 

Anyway, just call me Neville No Friends (sorry for Neville bashing, mea culpa).