PART 3 Dear Mike, "A Series of Letters from the Left to the Right:

Commentary: On December 2, 2011 me and my blog were excoriated by a young "conservative" named Mike, who wanted to give me a hiding for my communist views on "unregulated" capitalism. He called me or more precisely my views "ridiculous" I'll let you decide who is ridiculous.

His tirade was quite lengthy so Im going to publish my response in nine parts under my:

"A Series of Letters from the Left to the Right: Dear Mike part 1-9.

Since his attack was full of vitriol I have taken off the gloves as I see no point of entertaining his bombastic rhetoric.

He started with my "Thought for the Day" which are intended as a tongue in cheek rebuff of current obtuse conservative thinking. That will serve as Part 1-4 of my responses.

Parts 5-9 are in-response to the object of his real distain—my critique of Adam Smith Re-examined.

I have color coded my blog post that he 'critiqued in red—his critique in blue—and my response to his critique in black.

PART 3 Dear Mike, "A Series of Letters from the Left to the Right:

Thought for the Day: If taxation of the rich is a “redistribution” of wealth?— What is cutting taxes on the wealthy with money borrowed from China?

I think Weber is really confused about what a tax cut is; he seems to have tax cuts confused with subsidies. Maybe it’s the terminology used: “giving a tax cut” sounds like you are giving something to someone, but what it actually means is gov’t is letting that entity keep what it already owns.

Dear Mike, Under the current monetary system which is corrupt and I believe unconstitutional the banks "own" the monetary system lock stock and barrel. Under the original Constitutional mandate—the Congress alone had control of the currency. Its printing and distribution. That money was and still is printed by the Treasury Dept. and is backed by the full faith and credit of government of the (taxpayers) people.

It is—NOT—backed by the full faith and credit of "the FED", and it is —NOT—backed any one particular individual citizen, or private bankers. The American dollar has value—solely because—it is—backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government—meaning the people.

Your assertion is that because an individual holds a dollar its his is absurd—without the collective power of America that dollar has no value to anyone you may as well wipe your butt with it.

Try putting your mug on a dollar and spend it, e pluribus unum, is on the dollar for a reason. The strength of the dollar lies in "One out Of Many" THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. The government should take back control of the monetary system like it did under Lincoln. *see "History of the Moneychangers"

Your rather simplistic assertion makes taxes sound like the government is stealing "your" money—when in fact—the government is loaning you their credit worthiness and on tax day is sending you a bill for services rendered.

Finally Smith made his position on taxation crystal clear when he said:

”The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. The expence of government to the individuals of a great nation is like the expence of management to the joint tenants of a great estate, who are all obliged to contribute in proportion to their respective interests in the estate.” source Wealth of Nations Adam Smith

Which cuts the legs out from under your specious argument that the government is stealing from you—it can't steal what it is owed. No more than you billing for services rendered makes you a thief.

I've already said I advocate stopping ALL NON-ESSENTIAL CORPORATE SUBSIDES.

Finally, every dime taken out of the "system" must come from someone else—US Bonds—which are sold as debt instruments and are a promise to pay back the money lent plus interest, that money comes out of future tax revenue. Tax cuts for the wealthy are not revenue neutral—as you so smugly imply—they are real and they do come out of the pockets of the middle class to the benefit of the wealthy.

Or maybe you think the tooth fairy magical pays off those bonds.

This is the end of PART 3