From the Mouths of Babes

A significant part of the failure of the Bush tax cuts to generate jobs and income growth flows from the top-heavy distribution of the benefits conveyed by these measures. The vast bulk of the reduced taxes were reaped by a very small number of families. In 2011, the average tax reduction to families receiving an income of $1 million or more (about 321,000 families) will be $139,199.

For this less than 0.5 percent of all families this is a total reduction in taxes of $860 million/week. Compare these tax benefits with the yearly savings proposed by cutting the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) health and nutrition program: $833 million. An obvious question is, why can’t this very small group of very high-income families give up just one week of their tax cut to provide nutrition for the tens of thousands of women and children that benefit from the WIC program?
~ from The Bush Tax Cuts: A Decade of Economic Disaster by William Barclay ~

There are scads of articles and commentaries about the failures of the Bush tax cuts and why the idea of cutting taxes even further on the wealthy will not have the benefits that its supporters boast of. Barclay, who claims to be on the receiving end of many of these giveaways, basically asks the government to tax him MORE for the sake of the nation.

I have chosen to highlight this one section of his article because, for me, it puts the whole argument into perspective. The politicians who argue vociferously for allowing the egregiously rich to pare back to the bone their financial responsibilities to our society apparently don't care too much for those who have no ability to care for themselves.

Many of these same politicos are ardently pro-life. So, where does that leave us? It would seem that they care far more for the unborn than the newly-born! They will fight to the death for a fetus, but will turn around to take food from the mouths of mere babes.

I find such a perspective morally unconscionable, to put it mildly.