This is a true story that I know myself to be true.

Person A received a $50,000 bonus from the company he was working for and opened a restaurant with the funds. He deferred paying the taxes to be able to afford opening his own business. He probably deferred the taxes illegally but did not verify with an accountant or the IRS because he was determined to open the restaurant. He did pay the taxes eventually.

After opening the restaurant one of his employees asked him if he could ever vote for a woman for president. He said yes but knowing what was really being asked added it would never be a woman like Hillary Clinton. The employee asked why.

The answer was simple. Among many reasons, he answered with this. Last night I saw Hillary on the O'Reilly Factor. On the show she admitted that in her mind the government was entitled to 70% of the wealthy's income. The employee actually thought that was fair.

So the restaurant owner compared that one time proposed tax of $35,000 to what he did. By possibly skirting the law and delaying paying the taxes on the $50,000 he was still just barely able to open the restaurant. He surely could not have opened the restaurant if he had only netted $15,000. As a result he was able to open the restaurant and generated over $800,000 of revenue his first year. His first year in business he generated through sales taxes, employment taxes, property taxes, income taxes, etc over $180,000 in tax revenue and was on pace to do more his second year.

So I ask you as he asked his employee, which should the government want, the annual and repetitive taxes of over $180,000 or the one time theft of $35,000? He should not have had to skirt the law to pull this off. It really is an easy answer; so who has been brainwashed?