Robin Garwood wrote:
It's unfortunate, because you actually raise a really good philosophical
question: should we, as citizens, be forced to pay taxes for things we
morally oppose?  I tend to agree with you, Neal.  I would love to know that
none of my tax dollars went to the pentagon, new build highway, nuclear
plants, coal industry subsidies, etc.

Here's a creative solution: rather than tax dollars being budgeted by
legislatures, let's create the budgets as taxpayers.  Your yearly tax form
could include an allocation sheet that would allow you to choose where your
dollars go, and exempt them from projects with which you morally disagree.
We could turn April 15th into a celebration of democracy - I'd love paying
taxes if I knew where my money was going.

Mark Anderson replies:
You know there's a much simpler way of allowing us to spend our money the
way we want to:  don't tax us in the first place and we can spend our money
where we want to.  There's a whole lot of areas in which I would like
government not to spend my money, including most of the areas Robin
mentioned above.  But I also oppose employee controls, trade control, and
other infringements on individual freedom.  I would love to just argue with
people on Lists like this about the rationality of personally boycotting
various big businesses.  But instead I'm also fighting the government who is
using my money to insert themselves in the middle of private transactions
such as hiring, firing, buying, and selling.  This activity feels immoral to
me.

I assume I can count on you, Robin, to be in my corner on this.  You and
like minded people can spend all your money on those causes you find so
worth spending money on.  Others who believe more money should go to the
pentagon, highways, nuclear plants, or the coal industry can spend their
money on those things.  Much simpler than setting up another massive
bureaucracy to trace the taxes to each person's favored target, as you
suggested above.

Admittedly, we may still need some tax money to spend on public goods, such
as the court system and protection of the air and water we all use.  There
may be some people morally opposed to these uses also, but the spending
would be a tenth of our current taxes, so 90% of the problem would be
resolved.  About as good as can be expected in our complex society.  Good
idea, Robin!

Mark V Anderson
Bancroft


REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to