Class warfare?

President Bush has been aggressively attacked in the last couple of months because of his newest tax cut proposals that seem to unfairly favor the rich. Personally, I don't really see how a tax cut favoring those who pay most of the taxes could be anything but fair.\nThe wealthy are still the ones paying the higher percentage of taxes that our progressive system expects of them. Yet the "class warfare" alarm continues to be sounded with a call to Americans to voice their envy and disdain at all those who have succeeded where they have failed for one reason or another.\nOne would tend to think the progress we've made in improving the standard of living for all Americans would certainly appease those that believe they're oppressed by the rich. The occasional corporate scandal probably adds fuel to the fire of contempt that infects the entire sub-million dollar income bracket. Still, our response should be preventative laws, not class warfare rhetoric.\nWe are aware that it is American nature, since our nation's inception, to try our best to avoid taxes. This hasn't changed much in 227 years. However, our penchant for charity has only increased. Many of those we condemn for greed and avarice have actually donated huge amounts of money to numerous charities. This could be motivated by self-promotion, religious reasons, posterity or simple kindness. In fact, just this last Sunday, Bill Gates announced that his charitable foundation would spend $200 million dollars on medical research that will specifically target diseases most prevalent in poor countries. \nWe are sometimes too quick to attack a person's character simply because of that individual's financial success. Spend less time criticizing others' success and quench your own jealousy by achieving something that other people will envy. \nSome citizens of this country have been tricked into thinking that one of the government's responsibilities is to spread wealth equally among all of its citizens -- the U.S. government is not here to act as any sort of Robin Hood. Instead, it exists to provide its people with the opportunity to pursue wealth; not to provide the wealth itself. As Benjamin Franklin once said, "The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."\nNow of course, in the interest of providing equality of opportunity we cannot allow a monopoly of wealth. If a few people own everything there can be nothing but poverty for the rest. However, we must not forget that the goal isn't to redistribute property equally among all, but enough to insure that everyone has a chance to succeed.\nRemember, America's economic pie grows as the consumers fill it. If we allow people to spend their hard earned money, the pie expands. If we take it all and divide it equally, then everybody will live in equal misery and idleness, and all we have is crust. \nWe must be careful with the manner in which we tax. Penalizing people for being successful has a tendency to discourage growth. Most of us probably agree with Adam Smith: "It isn't by the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest." We work hard and are industrious because of a desire to subsist and accumulate wealth. It cannot be healthy for a country to encourage laziness through a tax policy that penalizes hard work.\nWe shouldn't verbally bash our leaders every time one of their tax cuts happens to allow the rich to maintain a little more of what they've earned. This is especially true if our own tax cuts are proportionally higher.\nSounds fair to me.