 |
| Looney |
"I tremble for my
country when I reflect that God is just" – Thomas Jefferson
There is a difference, people in Connecticut may have noticed, between tax cuts proposed by fiscally conservative Republicans and “tax cuts” proposed by progressive Democrats.
The tax cut favored by progressive Democrats such as
President Pro Tem of the State Senate Martin Looney and Speaker of the State
House of Representatives Matt Ritter are first collected by the state and then
distributed, according to progressive principles, to various constituencies
favored by tax collecting Democrats.
When Republicans propose tax cuts, personal assets are left
in the charge of taxpayers -- which is to say, essential choices that shape private
futures are left in private hands, rather than the sometimes grasping hands of
politicians. The possibility of collecting and distributing tax money uncollected is therefore foreclosed,
because you cannot redistribute an uncollected tax levy, and the redistribution
of taxes collected lies at the heart of postmodern progressivism.
The turnstile principle of all authoritarian governmental
schemes is that tax money collected by government should be distributed as the
governor – whether it be a Caesar, a monarch, or an autocracy – sees fit.
The essential question that shapes all governments is – Who
decides what is to be done? Monarchies, kingly autocracies, have fallen in the
past because monarchs have imposed upon a mercantile class excessive taxation
to absorb the excessive spending of improvident governments. The French
Revolution began in dark corners of Paris, France among merchants who could not
provide the city with bread that had become too costly and scarce because the
crown had emptied its treasury to pay for a costly war and imposed additional
taxes upon a populace straining to make ends meet.
The Connecticut proletariat just now is straining to make ends meet. Price prognosticators have said that the price of gas in Connecticut will reach $6 a gallon by mid-summer. And the gas will be purchased, thanks to inflation, with depreciated dollars.
The
classic definition of inflation is – too many dollars, printed in Washington D.C.
by the truckload, chasing too few goods. Inflation is corralled when goods and
jobs increase, spending decreases, and a modest federal government reduces the
printing of money. Everyone knows this, including Connecticut’s “savior
politicians” who cynically exploit problems they themselves have caused in
order to harvest votes from economically disordered constituents.
In Connecticut, tax increases have been permanent, tax cuts
temporary. Republican gubernatorial prospect Bob Stefanowski, along with a
Republican minority in the General Assembly, have put forward a plan that will,
assuming passage of the plan is possible, permanently cut some taxes, find
savings in the state’s budget through employment consolidation and attrition,
and cut spending. Democrats in the state’s increasingly progressive General
Assembly, along with Democrat Governor Ned Lamont, have offered tax increases,
self-elapsing tax rebates and progressive tax increases.
The rational for a status
quo Democrat getting and spending plan was presented by the two Democrat
leaders of the General Assembly.
According to an account in a Hartford
paper, “Senate President Pro Tem Martin Looney of New Haven and Bob Duff of
Norwalk said the state should not launch into large tax cuts and instead needs
to properly use the new-found surplus after years of fiscal mistakes and
deficits.
“’The Republicans’ short-sighted and foolish fiscal ideas
undo the work of the bipartisan 2017 budget and would steer our state right
back into the cycle of cuts and tax increases,’ the senators said. ‘Republicans
would rather pit hard-working Americans against each other than blame a Russian
warmongering tyrant or the oil corporations lining their own pockets. Now is
not the time for political games. Connecticut will not give you a dollar today
to take $100 from your grandchild tomorrow.’”
These are easily delivered promises, because maintenance of
a crippling status quo demands no
expenditure of energy from a General Assembly commanded by Democrats for more
than three decades. The last line in the Democrat’s campaign manifesto is a
neat inversion, if not an outright lie -- “Connecticut will not give you a
dollar today to take $100 from your grandchild tomorrow.”
No kidding?
Who in the General Assembly was in charge of an employment
pension fund into which not a cent was deposited for the first two decades of
the fund? Who struck the lock off the lockbox of a fund devoted to the maintenance
of Connecticut’s infrastructure, and then pilfered the funds to pay for
extravagant spending -- payment due on the bill being passed along to the grandchildren
and great grandchildren of the improvident spenders in the General Assembly?
Russian President and warmonger Vladimir Putin, if reports
of his health are true, may sooner rather than later meet his maker, but the
Just God before whom Jefferson trembled certainly understands that Putin’s
weighty sins have nothing to do with Connecticut Democrat’s improvident
spending. It was not Putin who robbed Looney’s and Duff’s grandchildren and
great grandchildren of their just patrimony by accumulating and passing along
to them a state debt of $58 billion.
That dishonor falls to -- guess who?
Comments