If you believe that majority opinion, desires and wants are right and moral or that majority vote makes something that is inherently evil, unjust and immoral all of a sudden good, Just and moral then you are suggesting that such things as universal suffrage should not have been allowed, segregation laws should have been kept and slavery should not have been abolished. Why? Because the majority of people, even some women, didn’t think that women should be allowed to vote, majority of white people did not think that whites and blacks were equal and should remain segregated and majority of Americans did not believe Lincoln was right to free the slaves (not necessarily because they didn’t think it was the right thing to do, but because of “practical” reasons). Yet, despite majority opinion, women did get the right to vote, racial minorities were finally given equal status to whites, and slaves were freed.

Right is right and wrong is wrong; it doesn’t matter that everyone but one person thinks that it’s right, if it is inherently wrong, it’s wrong. For example, if the world decided that the right thing to do was to jump off the Brooklyn Bridge, would you jump? This example further illustrates the fact that some things cannot be, should not be, and must never be subject to a vote.  These inalienable rights include: Freedom of speech, freedom of philosophy (including religion), right to one’s own life and liberty, right to pursue one’s happiness, right to one’s property (including income and assets), and right to be married and have a family (not necessarily man and woman and not necessarily by birthing children), among others. Yet many of these rights are violated by our government and the majority of the people in this country without them even realizing that they are doing so.

One of the biggest injustice in the US — this is going to infuriate pretty much all of the liberals and progressives, most democrats, and many of the racial minority communities — is the forced expropriation of income from the rich. This in not an opinion, this is not a perception, this is not delusional, and it is not insane, it is the unadulterated and absolute truth. Politicians tell everyone that the rich don’t pay their fair share of income taxes, and that they should be made to pay more and that everyone else deserves to get more from the government, i.e., everyone else is entitled to more and more of the hard-earned money of the higher income bracket earners. But this is jast a lie and a ploy to win votes, so these despicable individuals can stay in power or get elected to power. Here are the facts:

  • The top 1% pay for about 40% of the income taxes collected and pay an average tax rate of about 25%, but only make some 18% of the total income made in this country;
  • The top 10% pay for over 70% of the income taxes collected and pay an average tax rate of about 20%, but only make about 38% of the total income made in this country; but
  • The bottom 50% pay only about 2% of the income taxes collected and pay an average tax rate of about 2%, but make some 13% of the total income made in this country.

These are the facts; indisputable, unvarnished, unmanipulated, plain, and hard facts. Yet when the rich want their taxes cut, the majority of people call them greedy and selfish. It’s interesting what the perception of greed is among the majority of people: When the rich want to keep more of the money that they’ve earned, the majority call them greedy. Yet, when the poor DEMAND more money for themselves from the government, which is to say that the poor are calling for the government to FORCE the rich to give the poor more money, that is somehow noble and not greedy and not selfish. Huh, go figure!

Embarrassed beyond belief, the liberals, progressives, Democrats and the advocates for the majority of racial communities will angrily yell back, “THEY CAN AFFORD IT, [CUNT/FUCKING ASSHOLE]!” They actually don’t say the expletive, most of the time, but it is strongly implied, and you can see it in their eyes. And, they say this with such moral indignation that you would think, if you weren’t a thinker, that this was the absolute, and only truth that matters or needs to be considered. I love it when these idiots say this because I love humiliating them for this ludicrous assertion.

One of the first things I do to begin the process of humiliating these unthinking, self-righteous, hateful, immoral, deplorable, and despicable individuals is to lob a question: So, I guess you’d be OK with a law that forces healthy individuals to give up one of their kidneys to someone that needs it, right? Blank stare! It’s hilarious! They know they’ve jast been caught in a ridiculous argument and have no way out. So what do they do? The superficial and pretentious get angry that I dared to humiliate them. Typically, they’ll say even more stupid things like:

“How could you possibly compare kidneys to money?!”

My response: “Is that what you got out of what I said?! No wonder the country’s falling apart! You don’t even understand a simple analogy. The argument you made is that affordability is a standard by which we can and must justify human interaction. So, I gave you a clear-cut and simple example of using the affordability standard to judge what is Just between humans and what you got out of it is that I’m comparing kidneys to money?! How stupid can you be?!”

More huffing and puffing, more embarrassed body language, but no recourse but to say something like, “You don’t know what you’re talking about!” Runs off.

The sheep just go straight to, “You don’t know what you’re talking about!” and storm off. Since all of their thoughts come from others, they have to see what people they deem to be “smart” have to say about my argument before they can respond. Typically, they don’t come back because they can’t find anyone to find a hole in my argument.

The intellectually curious and somewhat smart will try to pursue different lines of argument such as:

“It’s the law!”

My response: “First of all, even though there was a Constitutional Amendment that was passed that allows Congress to raise taxes, and one could argue that this Amendment provides cover for so called “progressive taxes,” there is nothing in the Constitution that states that the federal government is responsible for the redistribution of income or wealth. Second, jast because something is the law, it doesn’t mean that it is moral or Just. If it were then slavery laws, Jim Crow laws, laws prohibiting women from voting should never have been overturned. Otherwise, you’re suggesting that slavery, segregation, and restrictions on voting rights are all moral and Just. Is that what you want to argue?!”

“Even so, we live in a democracy and we all had an opportunity to vote, albeit indirectly by electing representatives to Congress that support our position, and the majority spoke so who are you to say it isn’t Just or moral.”

My response: “So what you’re saying is that if we voted to bring back slavery that slavery would be Just and moral, right?!”

Blank stare, frustration, and realization that they could be wrong and may be standing on very thin ice.

“Well, the rich didn’t make their money on their own, so they should help support those that helped them make it!”

This has to be one of the most dumb fucking arguments that anyone could make, but yet people persist on making this dumb fucking argument! How could people be soooooo stupid?!

My response: “So, are you trying to argue that the rich didn’t make their money on their own but the poor did?” Realization that they’ve been caught making another dumb argument, but they go on to defend their stupid assertion, “well, no, but the rich can affor … . Never mind. Well, the rich make way more than the poor and so they should pay more.”

My response: “On a proportional basis, I can’t necessarily argue with that. Meaning, if the rich are and the poor pay the same percentage then yes, the rich are paying proportionately more in absolute dollars, but not as a percentage so one could argue that this is fair. But let me make a few other points. Weren’t these supposed helpers paid to do what they do already? Second, show me the contract that I signed that says that if I make it big then I am obligated to pay these helpers? Third, how is it that, even among my classmates, I am successful and the vast majority are not? If these helpers were so instrumental in my success, why didn’t everyone else that received the same benefits not succeed as much as me? Fourth, I have no objection of paying for our military, infrastructure, and public education, but the rest of it is forced charity, and no one should be forced to make charitable contributions, regardless of their wealth. Fifth, most of the helpers such as police, EMT, firefighters, infrastructure workers, and teachers are paid out of state and local taxes not federal taxes. Lastly, did the rich force any of these people to do what they do or did they make their own choices to do what they do? If we forced them then show me the evidence and put me in jail instead of using that as an excuse to extort money from me. In the same vein, if we didn’t make our money on our own, you’re suggesting that we are in possession of stolen property, so if that’s the case, why are we not in jail? Are you saying that the government has the right to use this as an excuse to extort money from higher income earners?”

By this time these despicable, deplorable, immoral and unthinking individuals realize they are wrong, but they’ll never admit it because that means that they’ve wasted so much of their life in support of something that is immoral that it becomes extremely depressing. So, they keep telling themselves, “he/she can’t be right, just can’t be!” So, they console themselves by saying, “You’re heartless!”

Funny thing, I refuse to give an inch unless they admit that they are wrong, and it infuriates me that they will continue their immoral, unjust, despicable, and deplorable behavior without regard to the merits of their argument, so I don’t take this final jibe from these human trash!

My response: “Heartless?! You’re the drug dealer that wants to keep giving drugs to the addicted because it “helps” them and in the process drag everyone down the drain with you instead of getting the addicts the real help that they need, and I’m the heartless one?! What kind of a distorted, fucked-up, crazy world do you live in?!”

The final and desperate retort: “So, what’s your great plan for helping the poor?!” They say this as if to say, you can’t possibly have a better plan, so shut it!

Please refer to my other posts for the answer to this ridiculous and idiotic assumption and argument.

Bottom-line is that the travesty of thinking that the majority opinion is the only just and moral solution must end, but the only ones that can end it are, ironically, the majority of the people in the US or the Supreme Court of the USA.

For more, please read my books, “… Under the Constitution with Liberty and Justice for ALL,” available at http://www.CreateSpace.com/3978962 and also available on Kindle, and “The New Constitution for Modern America,” available at http://www.CreateSpace.com/4281897 and also available on Kindle. Please don’t forget to rate this post. Any comments or questions are welcome and can be left for me on this blog, @Ahmedinejahd on Twitter, on Facebook or via email at AlexAhmedinejahd@Yahoo.com. Thank you in advance for buying my books, and rating this post. And, thanks for visiting my blog; I hope you get an opportunity to read my other posts. Have a great day!