| It's somewhat crazy to realize how much certain 'businesses' rely on government contracts, as apparently this company does. It's also infuriating that for all of the sanctimony, especially that which is assigned to what amounts to a completely arbitrary number (e.g. $200,000), she completely ignores the fact that there is ridiculous, egregious amounts of government fraud & waste. And to a couple of the specific talking points... - How is the economy doing in the Spirit Lake Dakota Nation anyway? As mentioned the income is very low there but there is at least one 'government-connected' (one that does 50% of its business with the government) company that is profiting quite well there. Great. - She says she's making great money (again, with a lot of great government contracts) and lives on the beach in a great place. By her own logic, she's being a d@*%! Why doesn't she commit a much larger percentage of her income to the Spirit Lake Dakota Nation, off of whom she is making all those evil profits. Why doesn't she move there? Is it not good enough for her? By her own logic, total hypocrisy. Paying taxes is a reality, that's fine. But there are layers and layers of waste that most people just can't abide. If I'm a d&%$ for taking that position, oh well. By the way, I don't make nearly $200k a year. |
Demand transparency from your government, not the destruction of government, which does do good work and provide good services to its citizens. (And yes the consequence of diminishing tax revenue on the wealthy – yes 200k$ a year is wealthy – is the diminishment and destruction of services that everyone else relies upon)
Edit:
Sorry i don't want to mischaracterize what you've said (since you actually barely mention taxes). So let me be clearer.
You are making aspersions about this woman, without knowing anything about her business, except the fact that she does government business. If you have a problem with the way that the government disburses contracts, that is a substantially different matter than the tax issue that the article contends with.
Does the author stand to lose if the government cuts back on services? Yes likely so. But without knowing further details, your presumption that her POV is invalid because she takes federal contracts, and that federal contracts are waste and abuse is entirely speculation on your part.