Many of you, including those who aren’t “rich,” have heard this slogan.  Some of you may agree with it and think those who have more, should pay more.  Others may disagree knowing that when the government taxes the “rich” that we all end up being taxed.

I am not adverse to paying the taxes I or we (my husband and I) pay to offer our government the ability to finance those things that we all agree are necessary for society to function well.  Our constitution even outlines those things, but in a very limited fashion so as to avoid concentrating power in the hands of a few within a centralized government.

I have known for years that the vast majority of taxes and federal revenue is procured from a very few of the wealthiest Americans.  I have also known the congressional budget office statistics indicate that if the government taxes greater than 46%, the revenue actually declines rather than increases.  But this is a startling fact I recently learned.

In the current financial crises in California, the voters recently refused to allow Sacramento to increase taxes to close the budget deficit. The government had already increased taxes on the wealthiest Californians, and there are too few of them to have ushered in this refusal of further taxation.

Now, why would the mainstream voter have a problem with further increasing taxes on the rich, and why would the Democrat speaker of the California State Assembly commission a task force that will recommend the state adopt a flat personal income tax and cut or repeal corporate and sales taxes?

Speaker Karen Bass has become concerned about the state’s heavy reliance on about 144,000 wealthy people to pay half of all the income taxes in a state with 38 million people.  That is correct!  Half of the massive budget of  California is dependent on 144,000 individuals.

And those people are leaving at about 10 a day.  They take with them the taxes they used to pay and often family members who also pay income taxes, property taxes or sales taxes.  Even more importantly, they take away small businesses that create jobs or sustain jobs for numerous others, who in turn pay taxes.

If there are less jobs created, there is less need of government services if the population migrates elsewhere.  You don’t need as large a police or fire force.  You don’t need as many teachers or schools.

The salary, pension and health insurance of people listed above, and countless others all depend upon the benevolence of 144,000 wealthy people.  And these wealthy people are crying UNCLE!  They are leaving and taking their money and jobs with them.

The problem we have is not that governments need to cut taxes.  They just need to cut spending!  One should not expect to have a job from which you cannot be fired, health care is better than someone in the private sector, and  pensions permitting you to retire at age 55 and that is comparable to your working salary.

This scenario is a global warming catastrophe waiting to happen and is already happening in Europe and in some cities and counties within the United States. This is not a function of an economic downturn, but of a chronically ill patient refusing to adopt a healthy lifestyle.

This doctor is prescribing a diet!