How are we going to get out of the financial mess we are in, both in Pennsylvania and in the nation? The Tea Party has been adamant about cuts and more cuts. To which the elites in the media, on the left and Washington in general say, "We can't just do it with cuts. We need to raise taxes."
To this I say, "YOU DON'T DESERVE ANYMORE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS!". There is talk of taxing I95 and 422. Talk of taxing gas drilling, eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts, a VAT tax, a Carbon Tax. This is but a small part of a much larger list. It does not take into account antiquated taxes that were never repealed when the times changed. Government has not been responsible with the money we have sent and continue to send to the treasury, by what reasoning should we send more?
We can not accept new taxes, whatever the form, unless and until government at all levels has proven that they are taking responsibility for SPENDING. The American people understand that there are some things that government must do and this requires revenue. Were we convinced that the government was being responsible with that revenue, then we would not have an issue. It is clear that this is not the case.
Why do we not see a responsible government? Because the money goes too far away from the people who earn it. When I send money to my township government, I can see where it is going. If I have a complaint I can go to the Mayor or the counsel and discuss changes to what is being spent. If I am still not satisfied, I can run for one of those local offices and take responsibility myself.
This is less so on the State and Federal level. The bigger the beaurocracy, and the more people represented by an individual Assemblyman or, Congressman, or Senator the more difficult is
a: to be heard. (It requires an expensive lobbyist or a rabble rousing community activist to be heard at these levels.)
b: to avoid the inevitable influence of big money on a large scale (again, the expensive lobbyists), or
b: to run for an office that will than allow me to take on the responsibility to make things right. (The bigger the office, the more complicated and expensive it is to run for it. This eliminates many citizen legislators from the pool of potential leaders.)
This was the genius of our Founding Fathers. They new this from their studies of history and from being beholden to a ruler that was a thousand miles away.
The trick to solving the problem is to leave the bulk of government responsibility with the local governments. Cut the Federal Programs (and mandates) and the Federal Taxes and let the local government handle things like police, healthcare, homelessness, etc. If my Federal tax rate went down to 5% (or zero) but my local taxes went up to 5%, or 10%, we would be paying less, and I garauntee we would be getting more.
The larger the government, the smaller the individual. This Country has been a beacon of hope because it was founded on principles of allowing individuals to flourish in an environment of largely "self rule". It was not great because it was wealthy, it was wealthy because it was FREE.
To this I say, "YOU DON'T DESERVE ANYMORE OF OUR TAX DOLLARS!". There is talk of taxing I95 and 422. Talk of taxing gas drilling, eliminating the Bush Tax Cuts, a VAT tax, a Carbon Tax. This is but a small part of a much larger list. It does not take into account antiquated taxes that were never repealed when the times changed. Government has not been responsible with the money we have sent and continue to send to the treasury, by what reasoning should we send more?
We can not accept new taxes, whatever the form, unless and until government at all levels has proven that they are taking responsibility for SPENDING. The American people understand that there are some things that government must do and this requires revenue. Were we convinced that the government was being responsible with that revenue, then we would not have an issue. It is clear that this is not the case.
Why do we not see a responsible government? Because the money goes too far away from the people who earn it. When I send money to my township government, I can see where it is going. If I have a complaint I can go to the Mayor or the counsel and discuss changes to what is being spent. If I am still not satisfied, I can run for one of those local offices and take responsibility myself.
This is less so on the State and Federal level. The bigger the beaurocracy, and the more people represented by an individual Assemblyman or, Congressman, or Senator the more difficult is
a: to be heard. (It requires an expensive lobbyist or a rabble rousing community activist to be heard at these levels.)
b: to avoid the inevitable influence of big money on a large scale (again, the expensive lobbyists), or
b: to run for an office that will than allow me to take on the responsibility to make things right. (The bigger the office, the more complicated and expensive it is to run for it. This eliminates many citizen legislators from the pool of potential leaders.)
This was the genius of our Founding Fathers. They new this from their studies of history and from being beholden to a ruler that was a thousand miles away.
The trick to solving the problem is to leave the bulk of government responsibility with the local governments. Cut the Federal Programs (and mandates) and the Federal Taxes and let the local government handle things like police, healthcare, homelessness, etc. If my Federal tax rate went down to 5% (or zero) but my local taxes went up to 5%, or 10%, we would be paying less, and I garauntee we would be getting more.
The larger the government, the smaller the individual. This Country has been a beacon of hope because it was founded on principles of allowing individuals to flourish in an environment of largely "self rule". It was not great because it was wealthy, it was wealthy because it was FREE.
Posts
2 comments:
In Defense of Real Customer Service – A Lesson for our Government
Carl Namiotka
This article examines the current condition and proposes a compromise solution that breaks the impasse between the Democratic and Republican parties. It presents a compromise that can serve as the framework for the future of our nation’s leadership. Although we run the risk of Balkanization if taken to the extreme, even socialists and libertarians can see this proposal as a step in the right direction.
Congressional Approval At or Near All-time Lows
The Congress of the United States is currently approaching even lower approval numbers. Both ends of the political spectrum are displeased with the results of both parties and this view has not changed in the past few decades. Apparently the citizens are pleased with their own representatives, but distrust the body as a whole. They cannot do their job properly.
People Get What they Want
Many conflicts exist in the federal legislature. Earmarks, “nanny state” regulations, social program funding, and taxation all have placed the nation’s economic and social futures in peril. Obviously the federal government cannot handle the job of pleasing its constituents. By transferring the taxation wealth to the individual states, we can give the citizens what they truly want – customer service that works! The red states can watch over the waste issue and monitor the programs better. The blue states can tax their wealthy as high as they like and care for their poor as they wish.
People can still have their Nanny Government
The drumbeat from the left has always been the following: “The rich do not pay their fair share,” “we need to take care of our schools,” and “we need to take care of the poor.” By transferring the burden from federal taxes to state taxes, the left can raise state income taxes to a level that satisfies their base. They can fund their own schools with the increased revenue and they can care for their own poor as they see fit! If they feel powerless to change things in D.C., at least they have a better shot in Sacramento or Albany.
Move Gov’t Financial Control from D.C. to the States
Let’s assume that the federal income tax burden is between 0% and 35% and all other federal taxes add up to another 15%. Obviously, that 15% to 50% is a drain on the citizens of every state. States currently tax their constituents between 0% and 8.25%. By flipping the responsibilities and tax burdens, states can adjust their own income (and other) taxes to meet their desired needs.
Keep Some of the Federal Structures
The goal is not to eliminate the federal government entirely, as the self-serving critics will claim. It simply lets them know that they are unable to handle their responsibilities. If Texans think that a program is important to their citizens, they can pay for it; otherwise, it should not exist in their state. The reduction in pet projects, waste, and bureaucracy will place the nation in a direction towards prosperity. Lands controlled by the federal government should be returned to the states and private citizens.
All federal roles will not be eliminated by this proposal. Defense, border protection, interstate transportation, federal prisons, and some historical parks will continue to be funded by federal taxes. Federal government needs to concentrate upon national issues and allow the state and local government to provide better customer service.
Reduce the Federal Tax Burden; Increase the State and County Taxes At Will
Our current system of funding is insane --by design. We complain about the amount of money wasted by the Feds, but we continue to send more. We currently suck dollars away from our states and beg for them to return home to us. For those that claim that this plan would be a disaster, they should be asked to calculate “How much total revenue, in all forms, actually leaves their state and goes to Washington?” Can we demand a shift of funding and spending control to the states and leave the other national issues to D.C.? Reduce the federal deficit, reduce federal taxes, and raise state taxes proportionally. Transfer the properties and assets to the states in which they exist. As long as the states are given a one year notice, they can prepare properly for the consequences.
We can no longer maintain our path towards self-destruction and internal sabotage. Even the terrorist attacks of 911 failed to unite our people under the banner of a common enemy. We must make changes to our leadership that do not cause both sides to have a Treaty of Versailles-like bitterness. All margins of the political spectrum have an opportunity to put this plan into motion and sell it to their constituents. Critics may call it extreme, but they call a spending freeze draconian. Ignore them, challenge them, and welcome them. What do we have to lose? -- only our mere existence as a nation.
-------
Carl Namiotka is a Master’s of Adult Education Student and advocate for structured education within the Tea Party Movement. He helped to organize six Tea Party groups in the suburbs of Philadelphia back in 2009 and continues to do political research for the movement. Carl currently was elected to local office in November 2011. His blog www.15minuteconservative.blogspot.com has been successfully used nationwide by students of all ages to encourage political awareness.
Post a Comment