Democrats & Taxes

"Make no mistake, tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter." --then-Sen. Tom Daschle on 7 May 1998

Somehow, I don't think Tom Daschle (nor Timthy Geithner, nor Nancy Killefer) will be pursued to the fullest extent of the law. His erstwhile buddies in the senate were tripping over themselves to tell us what an honest, good and noble character he is. It's sickening as a private citizen to watch these shenanigans unfold. I know that if I owed that much money, or even a small percentage of Daschle's default, that the IRS would put a lien on my house, garnish my wages and possibly even put me in jail. There are truly two systems in this country and it has nothing to do with race. There are those of us with no connections and no suction in DC and then there are those folks who toil(ed) in the hypocritical and increasingly amoral cesspool that is our national capital.

Increasingly I get the feeling that we live in an oligarchy and it makes me nauseous. Our elected officials treat us like little kids, too stupid to come in from the rain and in need of perpetual care. Towards this end our activities, behaviors and desires must all be proscribed. The Oligarchs however get to do what they want, when they want, how they want and erstwhile or not they are defended by their peers.

The whole Daschle debacle reminds of something I used to hear while living in Brooklyn. There was a construct that started "Oh, he's a good guy, but . . ." But, he killed Frankie's uncle, or cheats on his wife, or hits his kids. "Tome Daschle is a good guy but he cheats on his taxes while excoriating those of who want to try and keep as much of our own money as possible."

Tax Day

“To take from one, because it is thought his own industry... has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who... have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, the guarantee to everyone the free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.” —Thomas Jefferson


“The collection of taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to the public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. The wise and correct course to follow in taxation is not to destroy those who have already secured success, but to create conditions under which everyone will have a better chance to be successful.” —Calvin Coolidge

“Are you entitled to the fruits of your own labor or does government have some presumptive right to spend and spend and spend?” ++ “The federal government has taken too much tax money from the people, too much authority from the states, and too much liberty with the Constitution.” ++ “Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.” --Ronald Reagan

Overridden

The override in our town, on which we voted on 10 April, passed in resounding fashion by a vote of 59% yea to 41% nay. Obviously, we will conform to the wisdom of the electorate but it is disheartening that at a time in Massachusetts politics that many towns are voting down their overrides our town approved a pair of them that may cost us anywhere from $352 to $704 in the first year -- one of the questions concerned a debt exclusion that will supposedly decrease in cost to the taxpayer over the life of the 20 year bond.

The reason for our uncertainty about the actual cost of he override concerns the definition of taxpayer. There are two people on the Quarter Acre Tax Bill -- are we considered one taxpayer, or two? We're not sure, but we'll find out when our bank sends us the notice of increase in our escrow payments because the taxes have now risen, again . . .

When will we, the people, force the government to stop reaching into our pockets? When we have budget shortfalls at home we reduce spending. The government taps the "never-ending" supply of money within the population. The big argument for the overrides was to "keep our schools strong." We live in a town with a very good school system (as far as public school systems go). Had the override not passed, teachers would have been laid off, and class sizes would have increased. No one ever said how many teachers would be fired or by how much classes would have grown. The argument was purely emotional, and couched in fuzziness though the drain on our finances is anything but fuzzy (though it is emotional).

The money that we must now pay to the town equals at least one car payment, and possibly two depending on the actual definition of taxpayer; a nice weekend away; at least a few nice meals, and possibly several in a restaurant; a new dishwasher, Mosquito Magnet or some other type of durable good. Yet, we are happy to support the schools, we don't really need those things.

We moved to our town partly for the schools -- not because we're sure we want to send our kids to them, but for the value it adds to our real estate investment. If things continue to go according to history, there will be another override next year, and our property taxes will rise yet again. Eventually, this will affect our investment by making it harder to sell our house because of high property taxes.

There will be another sob story next year, and more lamentations that our schools will be weakened . . . if you want private-school-education send your kids to private school, don't rely on the public dime to provide it. Taxation is a power issue. By claiming ever more of our money, the government removes our power to decide how we want to live. Some day it may stop -- though we fear that will be the day that we, like so many other Massachusetts refugees, flee the burgeoning Peoples' Republic that is the Commonwealth.

The Public Till

We've lived on the Quarter Acre for about 2.5 years. Next week we are facing our third property tax vote since moving in. As a March 31 article in The Boston Globe states this month 50 towns in the Commonwealth are voting on property tax increases to cover shortfalls that will save libraries, teaching and police jobs and lifelong public employee 80% pensions.

At what point, we ask, will the government -- local, state & federal -- realize that they can't keep coming to the citizens for cash? At what point will we, the citizens, begin to demand that they stop? Last year 59 of 89 tax hike proposals were defeated in the Commonwealth. Perhaps the tide is turning, but the bureaucrats don't seem to get it and property tax-hike-proposals continue to flow to the electorate. We appreciate the opportunity to vote on them, but are indignant that the powers-that-be can't get their financial houses in order.

We understand the governmental tropes about rising health care, pension and other costs, but, at some point, things need to be cut in order to service those commitments. Decisions need to be made about what is truly important and what is not -- never an easy for a bureaucrat, but a daily decision for the taxpayer who is compelled by law to pay the taxes or else. No other "career" has such cushy bonuses and perks as does that of the "public servant" -- we're obviously excluding the UAW here.

We work in private industry, and we have no pension beyond what we save ourselves, nor will we have gold plated health care benefits upon retirement. Why should public service of twenty years equal lifetime comfort from the age of 42 until death? We think that the founders never intended for "public service" to be a career, and certainly never intended for it to confer a life-time sinecure financed by the public weal.

On the Quarter Acre we cut back in lean times, and moderate our expenditures based on cash flow -- we freelanced for a long time, so income was not always steady -- would that the government do the same. Alas, that will never happen because once an entitlement is granted, or a program started it must be honored in perpetuity. Hopefully, the voters of this state flock to the polls and defeat the latest encroachment into their pockets. We will be there, on April 10, casting our vote against all overrides in our town (there are two on the ballot) in an effort to keep more of our money where it belongs -- within our family, spent as we see fit, on things that we need, want and desire.