Taxing circumstances
Posted in Liberty's Lady by R Lee Wrights on March 17th, 2010 by Lady Liberty
Do you remember the first real, full time job you ever had? If you’re like most people, that first job coincided with the first time you really went out on your own. I can clearly recall all of the excitement that filled me as I moved into my first apartment. I can also remember how I felt when, for the first time in my life, I had to buy my own groceries and pay my own electric bill. While I couldn’t help but be proud of myself, I also recall being appalled at how expensive everything seemed to be. It didn’t help when I looked at the detailed accounting on my paycheck only to see how much was deducted by the government before my hands ever cashed the rest of it on Fridays.
Taxes have been a fact of life since governments have been a fact of life. While I’m not fond of taxes, I admit that it is the duty and the privilege of citizens to assist in paying for certain aspects of government. National defense comes immediately to mind. Unfortunately, over the course of many years and under the auspices of one power-greedy administration after another, taxes now fund myriad things the government does that the government is neither constitutionally nor rationally entitled to do.
Once upon a time, it was a tax revolt that caused this country to sever its ties with the empire that founded and largely settled it. A well known symbol of that revolt was the Boston Tea Party. Though grown almost to mythic status, the simple facts of the event involved a group of disgruntled American colonists who dressed up in rudimentary Native American costumes and threw numerous boxes of tea overboard the British ships that had transported them to Boston Harbor. Their point? They didn’t want to pay the exorbitant taxes on tea imposed by the King.
Within the last year, a number of Americans have participated in Tea Parties of their own. They’re protesting not just the taxes they believe are too high but some of the things those taxes are intended to fund. Perhaps the most controversial (and by far the most expensive) programs include health care reform and “Cap and Trade.” The Americans who attended Tea Parties are mad, and I don’t blame them.
I went to one of those Tea Parties myself last spring, but when I spoke before the crowd, I said something a little different than most other attendees. While speaker after speaker railed against Barack Obama and his efforts to grow the government to gargantuan proportions, I told the people there that taxes were too high not because of Barack Obama, but because we all had something that we wanted government to do, and we supported what we wanted even as we complained about somebody the things somebody else wanted. I said that if we wanted to curb government spending, we had to curb it across the board. The people applauded, but I don’t think they really heard me.
As we approach local elections in many places across the country, I see something that proves my point. Let me bring it all the way home to you by telling you about my neighbor.
My neighbor has his own business and a couple of kids. His wife works too, but both of them have talked with me about how hard it is to make ends meet. I sympathize! They’ve also both repeatedly complained about government and taxes. The government is too intrusive, they say. Their taxes are too high. Again, I sympathize. But what do I see in their front yard this election season? Signs promoting an increase in a local school levy.
How about the rest of my block? Well, I see a few signs promoting a local municipal tax increase which my town claims it really, really needs if it intends to remain in the black. At precisely the same time, there are reports in the local news that city leaders are spending thousands of dollars on a study here and a consultant there. Don’t even get me started on some of the other nonsense-much of which is expensive, self serving, or both-that’s going on!
One man in my town took matters into his own hands when one of the few cuts the town made involved caring for local parks. He volunteered to take care of a neighborhood park and was soundly rebuffed. It seemed to many of us at the time that he presented the ideal solution to the problem. Why couldn’t our town solicit volunteers to plant and prune gardens, to mow and mulch parks? This same man took his cause sufficiently to heart that he’s running for a spot on the town council. And what does his campaign platform say? That he supports the income tax increase.
A local community group has issued its statement concerning the issues on this year’s election ballot. It offered its support to every single measure that would raise taxes. In fact, the only measure it doesn’t support is one which would permit certain businesses to do certain things which would actually result in increased tax revenue. Huh?
I’m not picking on schools or parks here. What I’m saying is that most of us have some government funded program or another we actually support. One of my neighbors who proclaims he dislikes big government and does so passionately proudly showed off his brand new roof that was paid for courtesy of a government grant intended to preserve historic homes. That’s great for him, but how come I-and all of the rest of you-had to pay for somebody else’s new roof?
Meanwhile, a developer from out of town who wants to build something here that would provide jobs as well as make use of some property that’s long been under utilized is being run off thanks to protests and local government red tape. Why? The town and the people want a local developer to do it. The problem? There’s not a local developer in sight who’s even remotely interested, but the out of town developer is being blocked at every turn anyway. Apparently, we want more jobs and more tax money, but not all that much. Another area project that would quite literally bring in hundreds of very good jobs is stalled thanks to two small towns that can’t agree to forfeit even a small amount of government funding in exchange for a facility that would bring in many times more revenue and provide jobs to boot.
Our addiction to government funding for everything from parks to public schools (which, if money actually fixed the problems they’ve got, would be number one in the world and rising instead of just the opposite), and from grants for the study of frogs to the roofing of homes, has got to be broken. If we don’t cure ourselves of the addiction we’ve already got, we’re going to end up a lot sicker before the whole system collapses on us.
Our Constitution really only gives the federal government a few responsibilities: Among them are the national defense, the negotiation of international treaties, and the mandate to jump in if the states start interfering with each other where interstate commerce is concerned. Just about everything else should be the bailiwick of the state and the local governments. Obviously, the federal government has gone a tad beyond that. And we’re in the spot we’re in where states and towns are concerned because they, too, have taken it upon themselves to follow the federal example. Apparently, all of them are now of the firm belief that if it’s not specifically prohibited, it’s required or at least a really good idea.
They couldn’t be more wrong. But neither could we. We’ve let them do this in no small part because there’s something somewhere in all of those taxpayer funded things that we personally favor. And when enough people favor something, all of us are stuck paying for it. We’ve got to not only stop the taxation that pays for the programs that we don’t like, but for those that we do like as well. It’s not up to each of us to suggest that one program is better than another. It’s up to each of us to see to it that government doesn’t fund any of them. If a program is a good one, the free market will jump right in and it will have plenty of support from the rest of us to do so. If a program is a bad one with insufficient support, it will wither away as it should.
I recognize that this is a huge step and one that’s not likely to take place any time soon even though we’d all be better off if it did. But even if we actually had the collective will, it’s impossible to turn an ocean liner on a dime. I get that. But how about we start with refusing to raise taxes until government entities spend the money they’re already getting responsibly? How about we demand government tighten its belt the way the rest of us have to during lean times? How about the government start making gradual cuts like other people and businesses who are trying to save money? Better still, how about the government actually have to perform well to earn its money, sort of like the rest of us?
We like to say that the government works for “we, the people.” And we’re right. It does. Or at least it’s supposed to. Now let me ask you: If you had an employee who embezzled company funds, what would you do? How about if that employee threatened you, or other employees? What if you found that employee slacking off on a regular basis? Lying about what he had done or hadn’t done? Constantly wasting company resources? My guess is that you’d warn him once or twice, and then fire him once and for all. The last thing you’d do is give him a raise, or put him in charge of an even larger budget! Now answer this: Why is it that we have the good sense to run our business better than we run our government? The bad behavior is on the politicians. But the failure to deal with it the way it ought to be dealt with is all yours.
Lady Liberty is a pro-freedom activist currently residing in the Midwest. More of her writings and other political and educational information is available on her web site, Lady Liberty’s Constitution Clearing House http://www.ladylibrty.com/. E-mail Lady Liberty at ladylibrty@ladylibrty.com.
