"Many states believe there is little choice involved when the federal government has the power to tax citizens in the states, returning that money only if states comply with ever-increasing... mandates."
And that right there is the problem in a nutshell. The Founding Fathers were clear that the Federal government would only have the power to spend money on the common defense and the general welfare and that it would only be able to raise funds expressly to pay those bills. "General welfare" meaning for the benefit of all; not the majority, not the special interests, but for all.
Unfortunately, the result has been a government of good intentions, spending money on whatever program will help a politician curry votes. Ironically if everyone plays beggar-thy-neighbor politics, we all get equally robbed! The only difference is that people tend to be irresponsible with "free" money, with the predictable result of blossoming Federal spending.
The State governments themselves are even worse about helping themselves to the public trough; they get to fund programs without appearing responsible for the taxes.
The 16th Amendment allowed the Federal government to reach past the States, directly into the pockets of the citizens and then use that money to bribe the States into compliance with any number of unconstitutional mandates claiming it was just using the authority to "tax." Fortunately more and more States are realizing that there is no such things as a free lunch and that these dollars come at a cost; to our freedom and our sovereignty. However many people are already hooked, and the withdrawel symptoms won't be painless. Let's hope we have the fortitude to stick it out; otherwise the States will continue to be puppets of the Feds instead of the check-and-balance they were intended to be.
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Friday, March 16, 2012
Taxation With Representation
“No Taxation without Representation!” is one of the commonly referred to causes of the War for Independence. This cry was largely rooted in John Locke’s assertion that a government forfeited its legitimacy when “any one shall claim a power to lay and levy taxes on the people, by his own authority, and without such consent of the people, he thereby invades the fundamental law of property, and subverts the end of government."
The issue of taxes and spending remained central to the political discussion after the war. The Articles of Confederacy were purposefully weak in their ability to raise funds, to the point where it was difficult to discharge the debts incurred by the war itself. Even so, the Constitution originally stated that "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in proportion to the Census" and even then the funds could only be spent "to pay the Debts and provide for the... general Welfare of the United States."
It stands that the best kind of government spending is that which is approved by the majority of the people, with the costs equally shouldered across the people, and the benefits borne by the general people as a whole.
Any time one of those three criteria is compromised, the authority to tax and spend becomes perverted.
Less preferred, but still acceptable is when the benefits are reaped by a few, but those few bear the lion’s share of the costs. User pays. This is rare, however, because why would someone who had the ability and desire to pay for something decide to launder their money through the bureaucracy to do so?
No, in most cases special interests want to reap the benefit while forcing others to shoulder the costs. When the tax-and-spend power of government is no longer paid by the People on behalf of the People, it becomes tantamount to theft by majority (in the case of popular support) or theft by the powerful (in the case of a small but politically influential group). If history is any indicator, abusing the power of taxation eventually stirs the ire of the populace and undermines the very legitimacy of the government.
Labels:
constitution,
democracy,
founding fathers,
government,
john locke,
locke,
politics,
taxes
Friday, February 17, 2012
You Gotta Live
The "cost of living increase" was a brilliant scam to disguise the insidious effects of inflation. The powers that be convinced the masses that each year they had to work harder and get bigger raises just to maintain their standard of living.
That flies in the face of common sense. Every year we come up with more efficient ways to build better products. Technology improves, allowing us to make more goods more quickly while consuming fewer resources and taking less working hours. According to the laws of supply and demand that means the consumer should enjoy more and cheaper goods.
That was the result during the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution, where food and goods became cheaper and more plentiful. Why is that not the case today? Because the government intercepts these gains. By printing more money to finance deficit spending, they create inflationary pressure causing prices to rise.
In some cases like the tech field, the downward pressure of innovation is able to overcome inflationary pressures, but in other areas that are more stagnant (notably oil and food) we see prices continue to rise.
This is not the "cost of living" it is the cost of inflation created by government debt and the working class bears the burden most of all. The sooner people realize there is no free lunch the sooner we can work to change this pattern and return the fruits of progress to the People.
That flies in the face of common sense. Every year we come up with more efficient ways to build better products. Technology improves, allowing us to make more goods more quickly while consuming fewer resources and taking less working hours. According to the laws of supply and demand that means the consumer should enjoy more and cheaper goods.
That was the result during the agricultural revolution and the industrial revolution, where food and goods became cheaper and more plentiful. Why is that not the case today? Because the government intercepts these gains. By printing more money to finance deficit spending, they create inflationary pressure causing prices to rise.
In some cases like the tech field, the downward pressure of innovation is able to overcome inflationary pressures, but in other areas that are more stagnant (notably oil and food) we see prices continue to rise.
This is not the "cost of living" it is the cost of inflation created by government debt and the working class bears the burden most of all. The sooner people realize there is no free lunch the sooner we can work to change this pattern and return the fruits of progress to the People.
Labels:
cost of living,
debt,
inflation,
productivity,
supply and demand,
technology
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)