We interrupt our support of the social welfare state to honor Tax Day.
Having sent two large installments of Danegeld to the federal and state governments today, rather than be needlessly creative about the joys and benefits of taxation in a free society we quote from A.P. Herbert's book More Misleading Cases in the Common Law (London: Methuen & Co., 1930). This passage comes from the case of Inland Revenue v. Haddock, "What is a Cheque?":
"No thinking man can regard those parts of the Finance Acts which govern the income-tax with anything but contempt. There may be something to be said -- not much -- for taking from those who have inherited wealth a certain proportion of that wealth for the service of the State and the benefit of the poor and needy; and those who by their own ability, brains, industry, and exertion have earned money may reasonably be invited to surrender a small portion of it towards the maintenance of those public services by which they benefit, to wit, the Police, the Navy, the Army, the public sewers, and so forth. But to compel such individuals to bestow a large part of their earnings upon other individuals is manifestly barbarous and indefensible. Yet this is the law."
I'm going to head off to the Drones Club for a restorative. We will return to our support of the social welfare state tomorrow.
FURTHER INFORMATION: After Jack Bog posted his analysis of the President's and Veep's tax returns here, he had the same general reaction to his own taxes that I did to mine, in the fifth and sixth paragraphs of his post over here.