Robber Barron vs. Robin Hood

Accompanying song: Aloe Blacc - "I Need A Dollar" 

In no way do I consider myself knowledgeable in the area of finance. In fact, I'm rather infantile in that regard...the closest I get to budget balancing is putting checks into an account before 8pm (8pm in some locations, most locations have a 6pm cutoff) to avoid overdraft fees. However, there has been one issue of special interest to me lately and that is the growing deficit and the factors that contribute to it. Let me be more specific, I'm trying to figure out whether the tax cuts are good or bad. 

For the most part, I've been against the tax cuts for the wealthy continuing on. My thought process: you've had your fun and now it's time to demonstrate some altruism in times of national despair. Not to say that all of the billionaires are uncaring, on the contrary, the top earners are signing up for Bill Gates & Warren Buffet's Giving Pledge on their own accord. Even aside from these individuals, I have witnessed many other elites that are not top earners grace television and radio broadcasts saying they don't need a tax break, that their finances are fine without it. To all of those people, I earnestly praise and respect that perspective and realism. 

As a not-so-wealthy person (see intro), I don't quite grasp the tantrum being thrown on behalf of the inalienable right to greed. By all means, if your pursuit to happiness is monetary supremacy, so be it. But to be in favor of bankrolling money into a wealthy pocket while denying the impoverished unemployment benefits is not only cruel, it's hypocritical and sounds strikingly similar to a robber baron. 

I will put some personal biases on greed aside. When it comes to balancing the budget, it's unclear how a short term payoff for the wealthy seems like a viable solution when that payoff eventually contributes to the long term deficit that the wealthy bemoan. Aye, there's the rub. Yet as one commentator on NPR stated, getting rid of the tax cuts for the wealthy would create Recession 2.0. Let us take a moment to really consider the strings attached to this comment. 

To avoid a government shut down like the 90's, I understand we need to compromise and work together, which means the wealthy, just like anyone else, needs a carrot at the end of the stick to keep things moving along. So if the wealthy want to keep their mansions, by all means. Yet as a common American, I'm beginning to feel like a disgruntled late night booty call: 1. Americans entrusted investors with money to make them rich (Madoff, mortgage lenders, Wall Street tycoons, <insert jerk of choice>) 2. then Americans get burned by the venereal disease known as unscrupulousness and we loathe and mourn the system that we screwed with in the first place. 3.) Like a desperate tramp, Americans still appease and rely on fat cats to be satisfied so we can get our fix of capitalism and keep the (wall) streets going. Now, that analogy may not work for you. As I stated, I know nothing about finances...or analogies as you may gather. 

What I do know is that given this little olive branch extended to wealthy, I hope they turn from fat cats into doves and start hiring people. It's rough out there and it's hard to be generous to others in times like these. But let us hope that since we said yes to one of their demands, that a Christmas miracle will happen and the wealthy will extend their assets in the form of job creation, which is mightier than the dollar bill right now. It's a vicious cycle. Our government set out to claim funds from the rich to give to the poor, but it seems we need to turn tricks for a more sustainable life instead of playing robin hood.