The Wisdom of Ants

A wealthy man, ie: a man of high net worth has a greater need for defense than does a man of low net worth because he has more to lose and a greater likelihood of loosing it.  Therefore it is the wealthy man who should pay a higher tax for his part of the national defense, the legal system and the keeping of law and order.  Since the wealthy man has a high net worth he should pay for this through a type of property tax since it is this persons assets which are in need of defense.  By this logic a flat tax (everyone paying the same percent but different amounts) makes most sense. 

The profitable man, ie: the man who has a high income, profits from a very high productivity which historically is dependent, either directly or indirectly on infrastructure and a fair legal system and relatively free trade.  Therefore the man with a high income should pay a greater share of infrastructure spending, judicial spending and customs costs of government in the form of income tax.
(While I think taxing labor is obscene please bear with me for the point to follow).


It is the hard working man and his employer who stands to benefit from unemployment or disability should he lose his ability to work and therefore it should be from his labor or the employers profits that this insurance is purchased for him and it should be left to him the circumstances under which it should be paid.  This lends itself best to a privet system where by the employee is required to insure for these things to meet a minimum such as with auto insurance in most states but it should be to the employee the terms of these agreements. 

It is the lazy person who profits the most from social welfare programs and so using this logic it seems only fair that it is this non-productive person who should pay for these programs through a lower standard of living and if necessary hunger.  

Does any man escape the tax collector?  I say he should not each must pay equally for his own choices.  No power on earth or in heaven should break this most basic rule that for every action there is reaction and for every choice a consequence.  If you choose productivity and wealth your consequence is a tax to support the system and if it be laziness and unproductiveness then the tax is discomfort in this life.  Let no governments of men or angels upset this institution and take from the productive man the fruit of his labors that the unproductive may eat without labor for if everyman may eat off of the table of another without a cause then what point is there in setting your own table with pride?  

There is none for if my actions have no consequence the moral hazard is established and I will do that which most pleases me at the moment without regard for others or the future and will be as the grasshopper in the children’s tale rather than the ant. If I know and am aware of the impending winter and that there is no store from which I can partake I will make haste and prepare for the impending necessity and there will be enough for myself and those for whom I prepare but if there is no property right and if there is no right sacred that what I produce is mine it matters not how full my stores may be for there will be always more grasshoppers than the ants can feed and both will starve and freeze in but one winter and will not see another.