The Family Farm
POSTED BY: AnthonyT
UPDATED: Monday, September 19, 2011 23:24
VIEWED: 2704
PAGE 3 of 3
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
That is what I have heard. A very interesting culture from all accounts.
Sounds like the great socialist revolution was a disappointment to your family, Anthony. I can see why you have your opinions on collectivism. Do you think there is room for something imbetween all state own/no property and all individual ownership?
Hello,
Yes, I hope so. I'd be interested in hearing the details of such an idea, because I suspect that's our ultimate destination and I want to know what it will look like.
I want to see something that balances maximum individual liberty against the well being of society at large, with careful regard given to each.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tony, I said that it explains why you protect the wealthy because - in a system of ownership, your grandfather successfully applied the owner's mantra: Acquire, hold; acquire, hold... repeat as often as necessary.
It is a lesson burned deep as a survival skill.
However, I have you say that you seem inconsistent about "freedom". While you talk about the loss of political freedoms in Cuba (free speech, freedom of association) the thing that really seems grate on your nerves is "taxes". And while you recognize that is was the sugar companies (under the thumb of US investors and bankers and the US army) which made Cuba so difficult a place to live, the whole notion of "profit" seems to escape your ire. Because, as I said, your grandfather successfully employed the ownership mantra.
The other thing I detect is a whiff of family betrayal... It seems to me the family story is that the Castro government corrupted your grandfather's brother by offering him the family farm.
Interesting story. I should tell you our family's stories some day.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Anthony was telling us the story of his family. Then Kiki and Signe swoop in and diss on the whole shabang, Signe slightly redeeming her contributions to the thread at the end but still being a bit snotty in her previous posts. Why do people feel the need to do that? there are ways to ask Anthony these questions or point the USSR's connections to Cuba and the US embargo and its flaws without being unkind or belittling his family's experience.
My uncle went to Cuba some years ago, late 90s, had to sneak in, and stayed for a couple of weeks, had a brief love affair with a woman there, never told us much about it, I suppose it was over before it started. One of my former junior high girls at church, M who is now in 9th grade, came from Cuba when she was a tiny thing, her family came over here and they are only allowed to go back and visit once every three years. I don't like that because I think once a year would be nice, catch up with the cousins etc. We have a lot of Cuban families at my church, we've got services in English and Spanish etc.
"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"However, I have you say that you seem inconsistent about "freedom". While you talk about the loss of political freedoms in Cuba (free speech, freedom of association) the thing that really seems grate on your nerves is "taxes"."
Hello,
No, Signy. I have spoken loudly and long on these forums about all abuses of Freedoms.
Taxes are one of your special concerns, but they are only one of many for me. I have shared my deep concern is that taxes be fair, representative of the desires of the people, and not used as a punitive tool. If rich people aren't paying their fair share, then I would be happy to see them do it, but that's all.
You consistently declare that I am a great defender of the rich simply because I do not wish to punish them. And perhaps also because you see any acquisition as an evil act.
My grandfather raised himself and his family from a position of poverty through unrelenting hard work. Work the likes of which I am never likely to endure. He was made of sterner stuff than I am, and I am deeply grateful for all that he acquired on behalf of his inheritors- acquisitions that came only at the expense of his sweat and blood.
If you see some wrong in his actions or his life, then you see him from a perspective I am incapable of sharing. Doubtless there are successful men who have achieved their success by drinking the blood of other men, by wounding them and using them and climbing over them. My grandfather never bettered himself at someone else's expense. He was very lucky, and he had help from friends and family, and he also worked very, very hard.
I look forward to hearing about your family farm.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I agree, Rione. A bit of an attack going on, not sure why.
We all see things through the prism of our life experiences and the experiences of our ancestors. These are the things that shape the way we see things and why we all see things differently. Stories like Anthonys should be a conduit to enable us to step inside each others shoes and least see why we have the views we do, even if we disagree with one another.
Better to hear Anthony's story and try to understand why, than have the usual 'you're wrong' 'no you are wrong' volley that we see so often here.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hi Anthony,
This post is not going to be as timely, since I've written it up twice and somehow it got dumped when posting.
I think the confusion may lie in the fact that you choose or find yourself characterizing actions such as a graduated tax code, as "punishing" the rich.
That is your lens.
Somebody posted in the "let him die" thread that there is a social contract, and I think that that fits my lens.
The United States provides infrastructure, stable currency, patent law which theoretically extendes beyond borders, property law so that you can own and be protected in your assets, a stable environment in which you and your business can thrive. For that we want our cut. The terms are much more equitable than your given record label.
You stated in the "let him die" thread that we need to weigh our decision carefully before we "rob" from an individual for the benefit of society. Again, that's your characterization.
While I think we should absolutely be wary of such decisions, so that we don't punish, so that we don't rob, making the decision to take a cut so that we can continue to renew our infrastructure, which includes schooling for a competent and innovative workforce, which includes roads and bridges, which includes manufacturing at home, so that your company and others can continue to sell to a plush consumer base, is not Robbery.
And as we have discussed a long time back, I maintain that businesses reap more benefit from our infrastructure than any individual, and as such should contribute more to its well-being, from those roads, to our court system, and on and on.
I think what makes the word "robbery" inviting is that the terms keep changing, that the contract keeps being rewritten. But this rewriting has trended for the last 30 years, as lower taxes for the wealthy and big business and less and less regulation on their practices.
Now, when we expect the put-upon wealthy to put in a bigger portion than what they had to yesterday, that is looked upon as theft of some kind. Pay no attention to the fact that companies and individuals were quite happy to get into the game when the rules required a bigger share of their earnings, just not happy enough about it not to use their vast resources(in spite of all those prohibitive taxes and regs that were taking it all away) to change the rules.
To me, that's like saying letting the TEMPORARY Bush tax cuts expire is a tax increase. Of course nobody is saying that because that would be pure BS...nevermind.
ON EDIT, this was in response to some posting that resulted from the original thread. I look forward to reading about your grandfather, but haven't gotten to that yet.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello Righteous,
A lot of my reactions in tax discussions involve emotional responses to the use of language, because my understanding of the tax code itself and the history involved is limited.
When I hear someone say, "Let's raise taxes on rich people" the phrase immediately gets my hackles up. Why are you targeting a particular demographic for punishment?
When I hear someone say, "Let's make sure that everyone is paying their fair share of the taxes, and that they have no special loopholes or exemptions that allow them to escape their responsibility" that sounds entirely reasonable to me.
Unfortunately, many discussions about the wealthy use language that sounds like a vendetta is being undertaken, retribution sought, or punishment dealt.
It may be that the mathematics of the situation are no different when you say 'ensure fair taxation!' and 'tax the rich!' but the two phrases garner reactions from me that are as different as night and day.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Fair is a word that means vastly different things to different people. I doubt anyone ever felt fairly taxed.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello,
I've spoken to many people who feel that their taxes are fair when balanced against the services they provide.
But I have heard successful businessmen say that their housekeepers pay more taxes than they do, and I don't think that could be considered fair by any stretch of the imagination.
I hope that the majority of reasonable people can come to common ground on the issue of taxes. What I think people want to avoid is the sensation that one group is taxed disproportionately to the other groups. This is what I think of when I think of fair: That all groups contribute a similar proportion of their income.
--Anthony
_______________________________________________
"In every war, the state enacts a tax of freedom upon the citizenry. The unspoken promise is that the tax shall be revoked at war's end. Endless war holds no such promise. Hence, Eternal War is Eternal Slavery." --Admiral Robert J. Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME