'Rhetorical Analysis Of Tax Citizens' By Michael Peers

314 Words2 Pages
The writer, Michael Peers, is upset about citizens being called “taxpayers” when they are sent their bills and in regular conversations. Nobody should be viewed as less than a person or as less than a citizen of Canada just because they don’t pay money to the government — I agree with his opinion.
There are valid reasons to not pay taxes and I agree with Peers when he says that people shouldn’t be judged or thought of as “less than” for not being able to afford the pesky task that is taxes. If the government doesn’t acknowledge poverty-stricken citizens as citizens, then why would the government want to protect them? If the government doesn’t acknowledge the youth—the youth that is still being educated and not yet ready to pay taxes—why would the government protect the youth? If the government only cares about the people in their country that give them money, what will happen to those who don’t? Will the protection of the police force be outstretched to welfare recipients, or are they not important enough? Does the government just not want to protect the broke and young, or will they actually go out of their way to harm them? These are all valid concerns going through the minds of Peers and I.
…show more content…
I too fear for the good of the common people. I worry that the government will stop caring about minority groups, especially if these groups are demanding money and care instead of giving money and care. If things continue in the direction they’re going, minorities that need a voice will lose their voice and possibly their lives.
That is why I agree with Michael Peers when he says “citizens” being demoted to “taxpayers” is
Open Document