While I think everyone should be treated equally under the law, some people seem to think it’s okay for the government to discriminate by passing or upholding more burdensome laws based on certain socioeconomic ideals.

In my opinion, any law that treats one person different than the next is an unjust law. Some on the left seem to think as long as the majority says it’s alright, it must be right/just/moral.  Democracy is a bad thing, folks.

“Consider it insurance,” some say.
Why is the government responsible for upholding the ideals of society?  Why can’t society uphold itself?  Whose ideals must we uphold? Why not let idealism uphold itself? If people by and large believed everyone needed healthcare, why can’t the majority donate to a non-profit healthcare provider?  If the majority, by and large, wanted everyone to have food, what’s stopping them from establishing a national/local/state book bank ran by individuals who run the day-to-day operations of the food bank?

Why is theft moral when the government does it? Why does the government get dibs on 160 Million American paychecks before they’ve paid their insurance, bought groceries for their families, paid their bills, etc.  I don’t understand why anyone ever thought it was a good idea for Uncle Sam to get a hold of our paychecks and leave us what they deem “enough.”

It’s pretty safe to assume that most people are okay with fuel taxes, state and local sales taxes, alcohol taxes, tobacco taxes, lotteries, (gambling?), and property taxes, all of which are very flat and/or regressive. It’s the status quo, and people don’t care about regressive or flat taxes that are already in place in most and all states.  Why is it any different at the federal level?  If I had it my way, I’d at the very least move the government to a 10% sales tax as its only source of revenue and let the states handle SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and all the other programs I’d get rid of.  At least they’d be run a lot better with the governing agency being a lot closer and a lot more direct to the constituents who have a vested interest and a great capability of influencing their representatives. I.e. all of these precious social programs will still exists, (sadly) but they will be much better ran as states will be able to experiment with that works better and voters/constituents will have a lot more power over their elected officials.

Moving many of the current federal programs to state functions would be a big step in the right direction. At the very least we wouldn’t have Medicare wasting $48 Billion in 2010:

In a newly released report, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimates that, in fiscal year 2010, $48 billion in taxpayer money was squandered on fraudulent or improper Medicare claims. Meanwhile, the nation’s ten largest health insurance companies made combined profits of $12.7 billion in 2010 (according to Fortune 500). In other words, for every $1 made by the nation’s ten largest insurers, Medicare lost nearly $4…

Actually, it may have been even worse than that: The GAO writes that this $48 billion in taxpayer money that went down the drain doesn’t even represent Medicare’s full tally of lost revenue, since it “did not include improper payments in its Part D prescription drug benefit, for which the agency has not yet estimated a total amount.”