Microsoft Millionaire: Why I Should Pay More Taxes

In recent weeks, there has been a lot of discussion about raising taxes on the wealthy. As a higher-income person who would pay such taxes, I have no objection.
I grew up in India and came to the United States in 1988. I attended graduate school at Stanford and have since had a successful career in the technology industry. There is no other country in the world where this could have happened.
I could choose to tell my story this way: “I arrived with $250 in my pocket, and got where I am based entirely on my hard work.” This is true, but it’s not the whole truth.
A more honest reckoning would take into consideration that I received an excellent engineering education paid for by the taxpayers of India, and that my graduate education at Stanford was funded by National Science Foundation grants and other U.S. government investments in scientific research.
My professional success — and that of the technology industry as a whole — was enabled, in part, by the advent of the Internet, itself a creation of public investments in research and development and by the available pool of talent, trained and nurtured by our public education system.
A more accurate telling of my story would consider that every day I benefit from schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, parks and civic amenities that were built and paid for by previous generations. They were much less well off than we are today. Yet they had the collective will to invest in their future and the future of their children.
I am worried, though, that things are changing in America. The kinds of public investments that made my success possible are vanishing.
Two decades ago, the United States was unique in its meritocratic system and the depth of infrastructure that enabled individuals to succeed.
But during the last decade, taxpayers in my income group received significant tax breaks.
The Bush-era tax cuts gave $700 billion in breaks over eight years to those of us with annual incomes more than $200,000. The United States borrowed money to make these tax cuts possible, even as our schools, infrastructure, research institutions and social services were in need of new investments.
This is extremely shortsighted. Our investment as citizens in our collective “commons” lays the foundation for our individual wealth and success. That’s why I’ve joined hundreds of other high-income taxpayers in calling for a reversal of these tax cuts. This would generate roughly $43 billion in annual federal revenue, which could be used to make investments in public education, health care and revamping our nation’s energy system.
Taxes are the price we pay to live in a civilized and healthy society. Those of us who have disproportionately benefited from public investments have a responsibility to pay back our society so that others can have similar opportunities.
It is only just and fair that our generation make comparable investments in our future to ensure that America continues to offer our children and grandchildren the same kind of opportunities it offered me.
Arul Menezes is a principal architect at Microsoft Research and a member of Wealth for the Common Good (www.wealthforcommongood.org), a network of business leaders and high net worth individuals that advocate for shared prosperity. These are his own personal views and do not represent the views of Microsoft. He can be reached at pmproj [at] progressive [dot] org.
The Progressive Media Project is an affiliate of The Progressive, Inc, which publishes The Progressive magazine. To subscribe to The Progressive for only $14.97, please click here.
Here's what you'll get from the current issue.
--Naomi Klein on "Capitalism, Sarah Palin-Style."
--Barbara Ehrenreich’s piece on the future for journalists
--Malalai Joya on the upcoming sideshow of an election in Afghanistan
--Ruth Conniff’s interview with William Greider
--Mikhail Gorbachev on the need for nuclear disarmament
--Kate Clinton on the gay rights movement
--Dave Zirin on the Pentagon taking over PE classes.
On top of all that, you’ll get 11 months’ more of The Progressive magazine. All for only $14.97. So please subscribe now.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead
|
CURRENT ISSUE: JUNE 2012
Cecile Richards
Ruth Conniff | "Millions of women are counting on us for care. And if we're gone, there's no one else there," says the head of Planned Parenthood.
What's at Stake in Wisconsin
Ruth Conniff and Matthew Rothschild | Much more than Scott Walker's future hangs in the balance.
The Mother of Midwifery
Eleanor J. Bader | Ina May Gaskin has delivered more than 1,200 babies and revolutionized the field.
Scott Walker, the Monster.
See more at http://www.zinasaunders.com -- On June 5th, the voters of Wisconsin will decide whether to recall Scott Walker, the monster created by an unholy alliance between the radical right and big business, who has made attacking unions the hallmark of his administration. Cover for The Progressive magazine June 2012: http://www.progressive.org
Come to Progressive Talks and Events
June 4, Madison, WI
Terry Tempest Williams on "The Power of Voice"
Ruth Conniff and Matthew Rothschild on
"What's at Stake in the Recall."
5:30-7:30 pm at the Lakeside St. Coffee House, 402 W. Lakeside St, Madison.
It's a fundraiser for The Progressive. Contributions are tax-deductible.
If you can't make it but would like to contribute anyway, please send your check to The Progressive, 409 E. Main St., Madison, WI 53703.










Comments
It doesn't quite work like that. It's not as though we're simply playing Robin Hood, and taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor. Who employs the poor? The rich. And if the rich have less money, then you can bet that they would rather tighten their belt by firing a few employees to remain profitable than they would sell their Porsche or pawn their wife's jewelry.
Not to mention that rich people pay for the vast majority of this nation's services, and yet they receive a smaller proportional benefit than the majority of the population. Do they get Medicaid? No. Public housing? No. Food stamps? No. Many choose to enroll their students in private schools, yet they are not exempt from paying for the children of other families. Their health care costs will now spiral, as insurance companies must raise premiums for those who can pay so that they can cover those who cannot pay yet whom they are forced by law to accept.
It's not a question of investment in the future, or of equality. It ultimately comes down to whether or not you believe it is right to force those who have done well to pay for those who have not done well, for whatever reason. I do not. If you feel that it is your moral duty to pay, then I suggest you make a donation to your charity of choice, and keep your vote out of my wallet.