But when he tries to rationalize his position, he starts to contradict himself. Repeatedly.
I always thought that farming was a profession. So wouldn't farmers be qualified since what they do is farming. Likewise, land developers squatting on land until the prices go up, or land developers. That is what they do.
The miffed lawmakers’ error would lie in thinking the tax break can go to a specific kind of person: family farmers. Sorry, that’s not how it works, especially since Wisconsin’s constitution tries stopping such games with its rule that all property of a certain kind must be taxed uniformly. Tax breaks are based on how the land is used, not who’s using it.
Rightly so: Otherwise, it all devolves into a matter of being popular (or, rather, not being reviled, as property developers are in some circles). Take that to its logical extension and you end up with tax breaks not going to family farms as a whole but, when some future legislators take it into their heads, to only some kinds of family farmers. Ones who don’t raise meat, say. Or who aren’t grumpy. Or whatever.
Taxes shouldn’t be about who you are. They should be about what you do.
Methinks that Paddy was simply trying to echo the usual right wing meme, but in a more creative fashion. Unfortunately for him, he got lost somewhere along the way.
What Paddy probably meant was:
Taxes shouldn't be about who you are. They should be about how much money you make. And the more you make, the less you should be taxed.
Post a Comment