In regard to Stephen Moore's "Tax-Me-More Lobby Doesn't Pay More" (op-ed, May 6): His argument that those who think our taxes are too low should volunteer to pay more is ludicrous. I believe that taxes are too low in view of our huge national deficit and our continued spending that greatly exceeds revenue. However, I am not willing to pay more taxes than legally required. Mr. Moore apparently believes the solution for those who advocate higher taxes in the national interest should simply volunteer to pay more. If he thinks the tax rates are acceptable now, or even if he thinks a lower tax rate would be acceptable, would he volunteer to pay, if not required by law?
John Becker
Windsor, Colo.
This is one more instance of the disease that is ruining America, namely the idea that the way to go about accomplishing your goals is by harnessing the coercive power of the state. Just as Responsible Wealth lobbies for higher taxes on the wealthy, businesses lobby for regulations mandating that people purchase their products, unions lobby for rules forcing workers to pay them dues, environmentalists lobby for recycling laws, health nannies lobby for bans on food they don't like, and on and on.
Instead of using persuasion to convince people to act in various ways, which may mean having to take "no" for an answer, more and more groups turn immediately and exclusively to coercion. Every time they succeed, we become a more politicized and less free people.
George C. Leef
Raleigh, N.C.
Kudos to Stephen Moore for his piece on exposing the empty rhetoric of super-rich liberals. It put a smile on my face and I've posted it outside my office door where everyone in the sociology and political science departments can see it.
I would add that while these people who want to raise taxes on everyone else are not giving money voluntarily to the government, they are almost certainly spending money on accountants to find loopholes with which to reduce their own tax burden.
Tom Blackford
Western Illinois University
Macomb, Ill.
In stating that wealthy Americans "want to give back to the country that's done so much for them," by paying higher taxes, President Obama uses soft rhetoric to continue his assault on privacy and individual rights in favor of collectivism. If citizens object to paying more taxes, they must by implication be selfish or lacking in care for their country. As usual for Mr. Obama, he sets up a false choice that refuses to admit an alternative narrative.
Is it not possible that wealth-creators prefer to redeploy money for establishing businesses or funding charities, or using wealth for any number of private purposes? Is it also not possible that Washington's spending is often wasteful and unproductive?
For Mr. Obama, the answer is a resounding "no." Either you want to pay more taxes to expand government spending or you are unpatriotic. Has a president ever had a worldview more at odds with the intentions of our Founding Fathers?
Tom Keene
Southlake, Texas
An interesting point is that rich liberals want higher taxes after they have made their fortunes. Those higher taxes make it more difficult for others to become as rich as they are.
Steve French
Costa Mesa, Calif.
Note from KBJ: Can somebody explain the first letter writer's logic? It escapes me. The argument he purports to be criticizing is simple: If you believe that tax rates should be increased, then you should write a check to the U.S. government. Put your money where your mouth is!
Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D. 