Well, it looks like president Obama finally read Arthur Brooks’ book Who Really Cares. Obama realizes that limited tax donations will not really effect his voting base. Conservatives are the ones who donate more money and time. I’m not exactly sure what the White House is thinking on this one. Add this to the blind stupidity file along with the Capital Gains. There’s no reason to do this other than partisan gain. It’s not going to mean more tax revenue. What’s the point in going to war with charitable organizations? What does the president hope to gain?
President Obama’s proposal to limit the tax deductibility of charitable contributions would effectively transfer more than $7 billion a year from the nation’s charitable institutions to the federal government. But the high-income taxpayers affected by the rule change are likely to cut their charitable giving by as much as the increase in their tax bills, which would, ironically, leave their remaining income and personal consumption unchanged.
Every time something like this comes up I grow more and more convinced that the president is completely clueless. The only thing he has going for him is reading speeches on the campaign trail. Everything else so far has been a mess.
I have been reading a little about Grover Cleveland, the nation’s 22nd and 24th president. Cleveland was one of the few Democrat presidents elected in the second half of the nineteenth century. After the Civil War the Republican party held a stranglehold on the White House. Cleveland was able to win as a Democrat and is the only president to serve two non-consecutive terms. He lost his first bid at a second term after winning the popular vote; however, Cleveland fell short in the electoral college. Some historians believe that voter fraud in Indiana helped Benjamin Harrison win. Four years later Cleveland ran again and won.
Cleveland was known as honest politician who took on corruption and cronyism. He also believed in limited government and low tariffs. It’s fascinating to read what past presidents thought about the federal government’s role in our lives. The philosophy has changed a lot in the past eighty years. Here’s a quote about charity sheds some light on federal aid.
“The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.” – Grover Cleveland
Can anyone imagine a modern president making this statement? Federal assistance is so engrained into the national consciousness that every misfortune is greeted by aid from the federal government. I believe Cleveland was right. Federal aid encourages people to look to the government for the solution to every problem. Is it really surprising then that liberals give less to charity and volunteer less time for community service? The liberal ideology is all about outsourcing all these good intentions to someone else, namely some well intentioned bureaucrat who’s more concerned with wasting money to get reelected than helping anyone. This idea that corporate America is evil and people in government are looking out for us is naïve. Both of these groups are the same. CEO and Senators both look out for their inherent self interest. Americans should quit acting surprised that Congress is inept and quit outsourcing our problems to the federal government. True liberty is not possible if a majority of the population is unwilling to live without risk. Grover Cleveland was a great president and he’s best remembered by this quote from Mark Twain.
“Your patriotic virtues have won for you the homage of half the nation and the enmity of the other half. This places your character upon a summit as high as Washington’s. . . . When the votes are all in a public man’s favor the verdict is against him. It is sand, and history will wash it way. But the verdict for you is rock, and will stand.” - Mark Twain
Last year Arthur C. Brooks published a book titled “Who Really Cares.” It attacked many of the incorrect assumptions that define Conservatives and Liberals. The main premise of the book was the fact that on average Conservatives donate money to charity more often than people who identify themselves as liberals. They donate more money and a higher percentage of their incomes.
The idea the bleeding heart liberals care more and give more of their time to worthwhile causes is a perception that continues to exists. Another false perception is that Conservatives represent the rich. Brooks stated that Liberal families average 6 percent higher incomes than conservative families. There’s an article in today’s Washington Times about a study by the Heritage Foundation that finds that Democrats are the party of the rich.
It appears that people who suffer from a liberal ideology believe they care more, give more, and are right about policy when in fact they have guilt about giving less, being rich, and being wrong. There’s some kind of self-loathing going on when everything is America’s fault. Katrina, that’s the government’s fault. The fires in California, that’s the government’s fault. During the last eight years it’s one thing after another that can be blamed on Bush. It’s no mystery that a huge government is incapable of providing the basic necessary aid to the people; however, it’s puzzling that Liberals believe more government is the answer to almost every problem. Well, is the government good or is the government inept? Please pick one and stick with it.
Recent Comments