2. ( idiomatic) To pay a monetary debt or experience unfavorable consequences, especially when the payment or consequences are inevitable in spite of attempts to avoid them.There is no such thing as a free lunch:
The saying "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" refers to this custom, meaning that things which appear to be free are always paid for in some way.Paul Krugman: The Time-Loop Party:
The Republicans are simpletons who are constantly distracted by the shiny objects that they call tax cuts. Libertarians are even worse. I feel justified in calling Republicans simpletons because the Republican platform, as Mr. Krugman pointed out, is excruciatingly simple: We promise to cut taxes, and by the way we don't support killing babies...Then there’s the assertion that taxing the rich has terrible effects on economic growth, and conversely that tax cuts at the top can be counted on to produce an economic miracle.
This doctrine was tested more than two decades ago, when Bill Clinton raised tax rates on high incomes; Republicans predicted disaster, but what we got was the economy’s best run since the 1960s. It was tested again when George W. Bush cut taxes on the wealthy; Republicans predicted a “Bush boom,” but actually got a lackluster expansion followed by the worst slump since the Great Depression. And it got tested a third time after President Obama won re-election, and tax rates at the top went up substantially; since then we’ve gained eight million private-sector jobs.
Oh, and there’s also the spectacular failure of the Kansas experiment, where huge tax cuts have created a budget crisis without delivering any hint of the promised economic miracle.
But Republican faith in tax cuts as a universal economic elixir has, if anything, grown stronger...
Republicans are hypocrites who claim to revere the Constitution and the "founders". They pick and choose the parts of the Constitution that support their positions in the same way that the religious pick and choose the parts of the Bible that support their positions.
Republicans constantly cite the 2nd Amendment, and never criticize it. If they ever cite the 16th Amendment it is because they want to criticize it.
Let's examine the Taxing and Spending Clause:
"...to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." The Constitution says that these things cost money, therefore the Republicans don't believe in the Constitution. They don't believe in the United States. The general welfare of the United States? What is that all about? It sounds like something Bernie Sanders would say. Why is the 2nd Amendment more important to Republicans than the General Welfare Clause? Why do Republicans choose the Horatio Alger myth over a unified Republic that is supported by taxation?The Taxing and Spending Clause (which contains provisions known as the General Welfare Clause and the Uniformity Clause), Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, grants the federal government of the United States its power of taxation. While authorizing Congress to levy taxes, this clause permits the levying of taxes for two purposes only: to pay the debts of the United States, and to provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. Taken together, these purposes have traditionally been held to imply and to constitute the federal government's taxing and spending power.
The party of the religious right is removed from reality. They believe in myths, GOP leaders who think that the Bible is the greatest book ever, and that Jesus is the greatest philosopher of all time. And contrary to what Jesus said in the Bible, they believe in giving money to their church, but not to their government. They also believe, as Paul Krugman points out, in miracles, promises, and faith. They don't like science, and they don't like facts.
I prefer facts. It is a simple fact that if you want clean drinking water, safe roads, a safe neighborhood, good schools, food that won't make you sick, then someone has to pay for it.
Instead of being simpletons, the Republicans could propose solutions that do not entail drowning government in the bathtub. Instead of seeing government and taxes as problems to eliminate, the Republicans could improve how we are taxed and they could improve the way that the taxes are spent. They will never do that because they would actually have to do some hard work, other than begging rich campaign donors while taxpayers pay their salaries. Isn't it odd that they never talk about cutting the taxes that pay their salaries?
The Republican simpleton mentality about taxes is so ingrained that they they cannot comprehend a world without it, even if one of their own dares to talk about it.
Name calling and mockery, as well as general weirdness, are their weapons of choice: Jeb Bush: I’d eliminate the Citizens United decision, and also I won’t blame Obama for anything:
My God, he’s gone full RINO.
This is a little like Darth Vader vowing to outlaw Death Stars.
And when the lame duck keeps trying to do something about things that actually matter, the simpletons just keep looping: Obama’s Last Budget, and Last Budget Battle With Congress:
What good will all the money that you have in bank accounts and mutual funds as a result of not paying taxes be, if Russian and Chinese hackers steal all of it from you?So the president took something of a victory lap in the message accompanying his budget, striking an optimistic tone that contrasted sharply with the doomsday talk from Republican presidential candidates and congressional Republicans. “Together, we have brought America back,” Mr. Obama said.
“We rescued our economy from the depths of the recession, revitalized our auto industry, and laid down new rules to safeguard our economy from recklessness on Wall Street,” he said. “We made the largest investment in clean energy in our history, and made health care reform a reality. And today, our economy is the strongest, most durable on earth.”
“This budget joins his others by placing America on a fiscal path that is unsustainable and threatens our long-term economic growth,” said Senator Michael B. Enzi of Wyoming, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee.
What good will your big expensive car be to you, if you don't have a road to drive it on?
What good will your baby be to you, if she has to drink water that is poisoned by lead?
Etc, etc, etc?
One way or another, we all pay in the end. The choice is ours. Do we pay some money now for a brighter future, or do we pay no money now, for a dismal future?