Money Shuffle

Many idealists (myself included) still believe that governments were instituted to protect people's liberties.  Unfortunately, that role seems to be disappearing in the rearview mirror, overtaken by government's more popular role -- money shuffler.  And the more money that is shuffled, the greater the desire to shuffle even more money.  Shuffling money takes a lot of work and adds a great deal of cost and complexity, fraud, and frustration  Government has become a manic Robin Hood that is continually taking from one group to give to another group -- and it's not just the romanticized notion of taking from the rich to give to the poor.  Government takes from the old to give to the young (education), but it also takes from the young to give to the old (Medicare, Social Security, deficit spending).  Government takes from the rich to give to the poor (welfare), but also takes from the poor to give to the rich (certain itemized tax breaks, transportation subsidies).  It takes from "business" to give to the "people" (minimum wage, employment taxes), but also takes from the people to give to business (corporate welfare/government subsidies).  We're just a baby step or two away from having everyone puts everything into the communal pot for the supposed elite to redistribute.  (If you're like me, all combined, the majority of your income already goes out through this process.)

What causes us to play this corrupt and pointless game.  Society has naively bought into the "feel good" notion that government-driven income redistribution will solve societal ills (and without us having to get our hands dirty personally addressing these ills).  Unfortunately, this is a false notion that only creates greater ills, causing failed program to be piled upon failed program.  By way of example, one key reason for the recent push to raise the minimum wage (or to create a living wage) is being driven by concerns that Wal-Mart employees (to name the favored target) are too dependent of government welfare programs.  So, because of the failures of the current welfare state, the proposed solution is to enlarge its reach even more, resulting in job loss for some individuals, which would then demand a greater expansion.  Even a democrat like Mayor Daley, of Chicago, can do that simple math and see the failure in that approach.

It's taken America over 200 years to reach this point.  It's not hard to forecast the failures that result from continuing down the current path.  Since our government is just a representation of our society, ask yourself "Is this really what we want?"   Isn't there a better way?  I think there is, but it requires 2 key characteristics:  (1) greater individual responsibility and (2) greater charitable assistance, on the part of individuals (not government), for our neighbors in need (whether next door or across the world).

Comments

[Jon Cox]

I take it you're rich and not poor. Most people who make these arguments are.

Let's do away with government altogether and let our children try to afford their own schooling. I don't even think their parents should be allowed to help them. How else are we going to teach them individual responsibility?

I don't see enough old people out on the street going through my garbage and begging for food. Let's do away with that too. Call it tough love. They'll thank us later, though.

[Craig Johnson]

Rep. Dougall,

That sounds like the Libertarian platform. Are you sure you're in the right party :-)

Craig Johnson
Draper, Utah

[John Dougall]

It's amazing that sound principles promoted by classical conservative Republicans like Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, George Romney (Mitt's father), and Ezra Taft Benson would sound so foreign to today's generation of big government Republicans.

[Capitol Gadfly]

Does this mean that you won't support a refundable tax credit or voucher for public education? Isn't a voucher, if in an amount in excess of what the taxpayer actually pays in income tax, a redistribution of wealth?

[Daniel Zappala]

Thanks for the thoughtful essay. I appreciate your willingness to think about the big picture.

I think the role of government (at any level) is to fund collectively those services that we cannot create on our own. Transportation and defense projects are a great example. It is important to me that these services are available to everyone, regardless of their social status.

From this perspective, I would re-classify items like health care and education as neither for the elderly (medicare) or the young (primary education), but rather for everyone. We are all young and old at some point in our lifetime.

Where I agree with you is that the government ought to get out of the business of "shuffling" money, through targeted tax breaks/subsidies to one segment of society or to particular businesses.

I think if you look at it in this light, we could do a lot to drastically simplify government, rely on individuals more, yet still fund those important services that we all agree on and all benefit from.

My list of essential services (what we can only fund collectively and that all would benefit from) would start with defense and transportation, but also include education and universal health care.

[Thayne Harbaugh]

"I think the role of government (at any level) is to fund collectively those services that we cannot create on our own."

-- Daniel Zappala

Saying that "we cannot" is a weakening idea. Certainly "we can" is an empowering idea and will guide people to find "how" those services can be created. Usually those that say "cannot" are those that choose not to and want someone else to solve it for them. What they don't understand is that government is not someone else. Many incredible things have been created without government by people that dreamed big and empowered themselves.

"From this perspective, I would re-classify items like health care and education as neither for the elderly (medicare) or the young (primary education), but rather for everyone. We are all young and old at some point in our lifetime."

-- Daniel Zappala

You are correct that health care and education are neither for young nor old but for all. Does that mean that government needs to provide them? Does that mean that everything that is usable by all and is important should be provided by the government? Are you saying that your fellow citizens should be forced to provide your health care and your education?

You are a better provider for your needs and wants than anyone else. Those that have serious handicaps and really cannot provide for their needs and wants will be helped by those that are philanthropic and charitable. Do you think that people won't be charitable but must be coerced by government? I despise that fact that government takes many of my opportunities to be philanthropic and charitable on my own. It is in my self-interest to do this of my own free will and government should not step outside its creation to take over these areas.

"Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force; like fire, a troublesome servant and a fearful master."

-- George Washington

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers."

-- Thomas Jefferson

Think about it. Empower yourself. Be responsible for your own wants and needs. You will be happier.

[Thayne Harbaugh]

"I think the role of government (at any level) is to fund collectively those services that we cannot create on our own."

-- Daniel Zappala

That may be the role of government in other countries, but here in the United States the founding fathers understood the proper role of government and spelled it out in The Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

-- The Declaration of Independence (2nd paragraph)

Government's proper role is not to collectively fund anything - it is to secure the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the citizens. The Constitution gives the authority to lay and collect taxes to congress (Article I, Section 8). Income tax was such a radical change from the constitution that Amendment XVI was necessary. Neither of these, however, are to proportion money to the wants of the citizens - for in so doing governments is taking money from one group and infringing the happiness of that group so that money can be given to another group. It is not the intent of government to provide for the happiness of one group by infringing the happiness of another.

The power for laying and collecting taxes by government is only appropriate for the use of protecting Life, Liberty and Property of the citizens - not to provide for the wants of any group. Too many people are willing for the government to provide for the "happiness" of one group by infringing the "happiness" of another. The mistake is that we are responsible for providing our own happiness.

The happiness referred to in the constitution is the ownership of property - as can be understood in the readings of John Locke as well as what is seen in the Fifth Amendment. Without the possibility of owning property and the responsibility of using it there cannot be happiness.

To think that the role of government is ". . . to fund services . . ." also misses the origin of money. Government does not have any money! The only money it has is what it takes from the citizens. The money that the citizens have is directly from their past, current or future labors. Benjamin Franklin correctly identified the origin of money as being the labor of the people. Government simply does not labor - it is an organization that receives its authority and resources as granted to it by the people and cannot have anything that did not originate from the people (think: "We the People . . .").

Are you willing to give up your labor to provide for something that you want? If so, you can do that without government. You are completely empowered to spend your money as you wish and persuade your fellow citizen to do the same.

Are you willing and do you have the right to hold a gun to the head of your neighbor to cause him to spend their money according to your desires? If you do not then you cannot grant that right to government. To use government as a tool to force the citizens to spend money on anything other than for protecting Life, Liberty and Property is immoral.

Collective action through government has no unique moral authority. Those that use government as a tool of force to cause their fellow citizen to be deprived of life, liberty or property (viz. unnecessary taxes for entitlement spending) will be held accountable at some time to the Laws of Nature and Nature's God.

The founding fathers understood what government is. Please take a moment to read the Declaration of Independence. Outline it. Write notes in the margins. Read _The_Law_ by Frederic Bastiat. Read Washington's Farewell Address. You can do that in a few evenings and your understanding and appreciation of your relationship to government will be magnified.