Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Pres. Candidate Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) proposes taxing single mothe

Rate this topic


CapitalistSwine
 Share

Recommended Posts

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn) proposes taxing single mothers at a higher rate than married mothers. (Video)

http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-national/rep-bachmann-r-minn-proposes-tax-code-to-promote-family-formation-video

Beginning at the (4:15) mark in the video to the left Bachmann proposes implementing a tax system that would encourage "family formation." The context of Bachmann's remarks make it clear that she would like to either give tax credits, or lower tax rates to people who are married as opposed to those who are single. Given Bachmann's past statements on gay rights, the lower tax rates and/or tax credits would also only apply to heterosexual couples. If implemented, single mothers would likely be taxed at a higher rate than mothers who are married.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, social engineering. That always works out so well.

Yep. And this sort of thing illustrates why, at root, the Republicans are worse than the Democrats. Like the Democrats, they want to use the government to control your life. Unlike the Democrats, they call doing so 'freedom'. (It's worth noting that Bachmann is a darling of the Tea Parties; in fact, she founded the "Tea Party Caucus" in the House of Representatives in the wake of the 2010 election.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. It's definitely worth it to watch that video from the beginning, considering she starts out talking about the "arrogance coming out of Washington" and how "the solution to our problem is not Washington D.C." Oh, and all about how you need to be put back in charge of what healthcare you have, what cars you drive, what lightbulbs you use, etc... and not a minute later she's talking about how the government needs to nudge Americans in the 'right' direction concerning whether they form a family or not. Apparently we can be trusted to choose our own lightbulbs, but not to choose our own marital status. The inconsistency is glaring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowering taxes on anybody or group which one wants to make the case for group is justifiable. Where's the part about the "taxing single mothers" more?

Someone who supports eliminating taxes on teachers doesn't necessarily want to punish all other professions. They might just be acting selfishly.

Anyway, which is the Objectivist presidential hopeful at this point? It is probably about time to star getting their name out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowering taxes on anybody or group which one wants to make the case for group is justifiable.

It really depends on the reason given. Imagine, for example, a law exempting Muslims from paying tax. Would that be a step towards respecting the individual's right to their own property, or would it be establishing a religious double-standard? Should Objectivists support or oppose such a hypothetical law? I think it's obvious that such a law would be a disaster and should be opposed tooth-and-nail. The principle behind it would not be respect for rights, but rejection of the separation of church and state.

Similarly, someone who wants to adjust tax law to benefit some other favored group is not supporting individual rights in so doing. They're engaged in special interest pandering. If you want to argue for cutting taxes as a step towards respecting people's right to their own property, you should be arguing in those terms -- not in terms of the purported social benefits of enhancing one group's tax position relative to another.

Anyway, which is the Objectivist presidential hopeful at this point? It is probably about time to star getting their name out.

I don't think there is one at this point. It's a pretty weak field, so far consisting largely of RINOs, religionists and long-shot WTF candidates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowering taxes on anybody or group which one wants to make the case for group is justifiable.
Nope, as KHaight said, one has to look at the reasoning behind it. What if a politician said "anyone who can prove pure 3 generations of pure Aryan blood inn his family will be exempt from taxes"? That would not be a good thing just because taxes for someone are being lowered. It would be vicious racism, far worse than higher taxes. Like Dante said, the Democrats want your body while the Republicans want your soul... don't sell your soul short.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, which is the Objectivist presidential hopeful at this point? It is probably about time to star getting their name out.

There is no politically viable Objectivist candidate running. Now, if you are talking about all of the candidates running, including the long-shots, then I would say Gary Johnson is the closest to representing Objectivist values, I have not seen another candidate come close in that respect that has so far announced or even hinted at the idea that they will be running in 2012, other than him.

Edited by CapitalistSwine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...