I remember in school being told the story of Robin Hood and
his Merry Men. My teacher thought it was a wonderful story of a romantic hero
who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor. My rich dad did not see Robin
Hood as a hero.
He called Robin Hood a crook.
Robin Hood may be long gone, but his followers live on. I often
still hear people say, “Why don’t the rich pay for it?” or “The rich should pay
more in taxes and give it to the poor.”
It is this Robin Hood fantasy,or taking from the rich to give
to the poor, that has caused the most pain for the poor and the middle class.
The reason the middle class is so heavily taxed is because of the Robin Hood
ideal. The reality is that the rich are not taxed. It’s the middle class, especially
the educated upper-income middle class, who pays for the poor.
Again, to understand fully how things happen, we need to
look at the history of taxes. Although my highly educated dad was an expert on
the history of education, my rich dad fashioned himself as an expert on the
history of taxes.
Rich dad explained to Mike and me that originally, in England
and America, there were no taxes. Occasionally, there were temporary taxes
levied in order to pay for wars.
The king or the president would put the word out and ask everyone
to “chip in.” Taxes were levied in Britain for the fight against Napoleon from
1799 to 1816, and in America to pay for the Civil War from 1861 to 1865.
What these historical dates fail to reveal is that both of these
taxes were initially levied against only the rich. It was this point that rich
dad wanted Mike and me to understand.
He explained that the idea of taxes was made popular, and accepted
by the majority, by telling the poor and the middle class that taxes were
created only to punish the rich. This is how the masses voted for the law, and
it became constitutionally legal. Although it was intended to punish the rich,
in reality it wound up punishing the very people who voted for it, the poor and
middle class.
“Once government got a taste of money, its appetite grew,”
said rich dad. “Your dad and I are exactly opposite.
He’s a government bureaucrat, and I am a capitalist. We get
paid, and our success is measured on opposite behaviors. He gets paid to spend
money and hire people.
The more he spends and the more people he hires, the larger
his organization becomes. In the government, a large organization is a
respected organization. On the other hand, within my organization, the fewer
people I hire and the less money I spend, the more I am respected by my investors.
That’s why I don’t like government people. They have different objectives than
most businesspeople. As the government grows, more and more tax dollars are
needed to support it.”
My educated dad sincerely believed that government should
help people. He loved John F. Kennedy and especially the idea of the Peace
Corps. He loved the idea so much that both he and my mom worked for the Peace
Corps, training volunteers to go to Malaysia, Thailand, and the Philippines.
He always strived for additional grants and budget increases
so he could hire more people, both in his job with the Education Department and
in the Peace Corps.
From the time I was about 10 years old, I would hear from my
rich dad that government workers were a pack of lazy thieves, and from my poor
dad I would hear how the rich were greedy crooks who should be made to pay more
taxes. Both sides had valid points. It was difficult to go to work for one of
the biggest capitalists in town and come home to a father who was a prominent
government leader. It was not easy to know which dad to believe.
Yet when you study the history of taxes, an interesting perspective
emerges. As I said, the passage of taxes was only possible because the masses
believed in the Robin Hood theory of economics: Take from the rich and give to
everyone else. The problem was that the government’s appetite for money was so
great that taxes soon needed to be levied on the middle class, and from there
it kept trickling down.
However, the rich saw an opportunity because they don’t play
by the same set of rules. The rich knew about corporations, which became
popular in the days of sailing ships. The rich created the corporation as a
vehicle to limit their risk to the assets of each voyage. The rich put their money
into a corporation to finance the voyage. The corporation would then hire a
crew to sail to the New World to look for treasure. If the ship was lost, the
crew lost their lives, but the loss to the rich would be limited only to the money
they invested for that particular voyage. The diagram that follows shows how
the corporate structure sits outside your personal income statement and balance
sheet.
It is the knowledge of the legal corporate structure that really
gives the rich a vast advantage over the poor and the middle class. Having two
fathers teaching me, one a socialist and the other a capitalist, I quickly
began to realize that the philosophy of the capitalist made more financial sense
to me. It seemed to me that the socialists ultimately penalized themselves due
to their lack of financial education. No matter what the “take-from-the-rich”
crowd came up with, the rich always found a way to outsmart them. That is how
taxes were eventually levied on the middle class. The rich outsmarted the
intellectuals solely because they understood the power of money, a subject not taught
in schools.



No comments:
Post a Comment