I am motivated by friendship and gratitude to try to ease your mind. Each of you has touched my life in some positive way. I often wish that I could be geographically closer and able to lend some support to you during your own times of difficulty. And to help you drink your wine to celebrate the good times! You are valued friends, so the hope is that you will receive the following comments in the knowledge that the words are caring rather than argumentative.
A little background for those who may not know my vantage point. I am a businessman, and MBA, and a member of the "investing class" -- strictly small potatoes, of course. I spent most of my career in small entrepreneurial enterprises, and among other things, created, implemented, and administered incentive-compensation systems; I have an idea what motivates. I even taught some business courses at the university level. Since retirement, I've puzzled over the federal tax system and have created some quantitative models to explain how it works in various scenarios. I consider myself to be a progressive, but with a strong libertarian bent. All of this doesn't make me an expert on anything, but it does provide an interesting perspective on the election. So, here's what I think.
Capitalism is alive and well in the US today. So is the entrepreneurial spirit. People who are motivated to succeed at what they do -- and there are a lot of them -- will continue to do well. We are very much a capitalist, free-market economy, and opportunity abounds. I have seen a procession of working-adult business students in my classrooms who were willing to sacrifice family time, leisure time, and sleep just to gain the skills they need to succeed in their jobs -- or in their own businesses. There have always been a few lazy people around, but I believe that enterprising people -- of all ages, sexes, races, economic background, and social status -- vastly outnumber the slothful. It'll take more than universal health care to deprive these folks of the opportunity that's out there for them!
I agree that the federal government is too big. Everybody has their ideas on how to reduce its size, as do I. For example, when the US spends as much on national defense as the next nineteen countries in the world--well, that's a problem we're all paying for. And we all agree that there are inefficiencies at every level of local, state, and federal governments, but most of us don't have a clear solution.
But nearly half of the budget is Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Personally, I'm a beneficiary of the first two, but I don't feel bad about suckling the federal mammaries -- I paid into these programs for decades, and I'm still paying for Medicare coverage today. Starting in 1965 when the programs were integrated into the federal budget, SS contributions were considered a tax. Everybody who earns a paycheck pays this tax, at the rate of a little over 15% of earnings counting the employer's share. People who claim that 40% of American earners pay no income tax are ignoring the payments made by and on behalf of even minimum-wage workers.
Taxes are a problem, and the US tax code is the culprit. The IRS estimates that $300 billion (!) each year goes uncollected because of the complexity in the code and the willingness of many taxpayers to hide in its labyrinth. That's a problem we're all paying for. I'd prefer that this money would be used to pay down the national debt! We agree that tax reform is needed, and I like a flat tax system with no deductions and a generous uniform exemption that applies to all.
A lot of people are getting government benefits, and the President and a liberal Senate are often blamed -- but neither has much to do with the system as it stands today. No major changes have been made in the welfare formula for decades, but unemployment benefits were extended by both parties in response to an economic crisis. This crisis itself is to blame for the large number of welfare and unemployment recipients -- not the President. Remember 2008? The first depression in eighty years was an imminent and strong possibility. That is not to say that the "safety net" doesn't need revamping -- I agree that strong conditions should be tied to all payments. My belief is that the increase in the costs of welfare and unemployment is a result of economic policies that have transferred wealth from working people to corporations and their owners over the last two decades, and that's a problem we're all paying for.
I believe that success is respected as much as ever today -- even by progressives like me! If just over half of 130 million US voters voted Democratic, that doesn't mean that we gave the founding fathers the finger, or that we hate success. What it does mean is that two complex and competing systems of values, rules, and policies -- Republican and Democratic -- fought to a close conclusion, nothing more.