"Keats" wrote in message
. ..

"Jeff Grippe" wrote in message
...
The governments (federal, state and local) in the U.S. (and many other
countries) use taxes to discourage behavior and tax breaks to encourage
behavior. I am merely recommending the proper use of this common policy
tool.


Wow! A real discussion with substance.

Part of the problem is that taxes (and tax breaks) are used for too many
things.

Some taxes are obviously used to fund the basic operations of government
and the services it provides.

Other taxes are used to specifically discourage behavior such as
cigarette.

Some tax breaks are used to encourage behavior.

The problem is that all of these things get jumbled up. The bean counters
come to rely on the revenue generated by the "sin taxes" and want to keep
the breaks to a minimum so that they can balance the books. You can say
something like "We are going to tax all X's in order to provide Y's"
(cars for bike lanes, etc.) but the X's are going to complain and the Y's
are going to view what they've got as an entitlement. You will get the X
lobby fighting for the repeal of the tax and the Y lobby insisting that
their service must continue to be provided. The people whose job it is to
make the budge work try to please as many as possible (being part of a
political system) but ultimately the stronger lobby wins.

As liberal as I am, I can see some of the arguements for smaller
government. Government is a grossly inefficient thing. The problem is
that there are gaps a mile wide in what the free market will provide in
terms of basic human services. If food, clothing, shelter, education, and
health care are basic human rights, then the free market will not, of its
own accord, provide a basic level of these things to everyone. Why should
it? Corporations are supposed to make profits not provide basic human
services. It took workers organizing for companies to provide good
working conditions, shorter hours, higher pay, benefits, etc.

The revolution isn't coming, however. So the system that we've got is one
in which those who can push hardest might be able to get what they want.
You want lockers and showers? Find a way to deliver a large block of
votes and you might get them. Or find a philanthropist who believes in
lockers and showers and get a foundation started. Be careful, however.
Foundations can be almost as inefficient as governments.

Jeff


The idea of entitlements knows no limits. Therefore the inefficient use
of tax money knows no practical limits other than the amount of money in
the government coffers at any given time. Once citizens discovered they
could vote themselves money out of the public weal entitlements were off
and running to the point that someone who doesn't reach the work place in
an air conditioned car wants the government to force the installation of a
shower and locker on private property for their private use. The cost is
not only the actual cost, but is also the cost of lost opportunity for a
better and more efficient use of this money.

How did anyone on this planet survive for those millions of years before
the invention of under arm deodorant and automobile air conditioners?
Wouldn't they too seem to be a basic human right, Jeff?


Here's the problem with this discussion. We can talk fantasy or reality.
Fantasy is always great because it bypasses reality. So here goes:

Fantasy:

Define what are basic human rights (food, shelter, etc) and what functions
we think are best handled by the government (waging war, international
affairs, etc.). Everything else is left to the free market. I love this idea
but it is alas a fantasy.

Reality:

We are part of a system that is essentially political. The system attempts
to provide what those in power have become convinced are basic human rights
and affairs of govermment. The system also allows a free market unless those
in power decide that certain markets should be entirely free. Laws can even
be amended on a one time basis such as Disney getting a copyright extension
a few years back.

In addition to politics, the system also has institutions that are
"entrenched" and have a life of their own. While this is still politics, the
root run deep.

If you can coax the political will for lockers and showers, and maintain it,
then lockers and showers you shall have.

Here in NYC there is a plan in place to have bike lanes that run through all
five boroughs.

In White Plains, where I live, they couldn't get the votes for bike lanes.
The compromise was putting up signs that say "Bike Route". Some of these
signs are in the absolute worst place to cycle. I was on the "Bike Route"
when I got hit and sustained an injury which essentially ended my cycling.