[net.politics] Hmmm. A new thought on the idea of earmarked taxes

jj@rabbit.UUCP (11/02/83)

I guess I wasn't very specific about exactly what sort of arrangement
I had in mind for the tax checkoff idea...


First, I would assume that advertising in any form would
be strictly VERBOTEN.  Not allowed.  Not permitted.

Second, I would reserve some percentage of the total
(say 25% or so) for allocation by the normal
political process.  Why?  Because things can happen in
the course of a year that require changes, and having
some discretionary funds is an absolute necessity for any
organization.

Third, I would just give each taxpayer a list of ALL the
disgusting little government agencies (and all the even
more disgusting big ones) and let the taxpayer write either
a percentage or a dollar amount next to each one.
I think that a fill in the dots method, something like an
automatically scored test format, would be just fine.

Fourth, I would REQUIRE people to fill in the silly thing,
and provide some (not too terrible) substantial percentage
penalty (of the taxes) for those who don't.  WHY?  Most people
in the US don't give a damn about their government, and they
should.  so......    (My officemate, rabbit!ss, suggests
that that's removing the right to NOT vote.  Perhaps he
has a point.  More food for discussion, but lets not get
off the track.)  


Fifth, non-allocated funds would go to the political
process.  <Although I would hesitate at allowing the
political process a checkoff of its own, that's too
easy.>


I'm sure that NO modern day politician would like the idea.
Perhaps that's why it might be a good idea?

(Just think, a bigger defense budget, more welfare money,
although undoubtedly better controlled, as taxpayers put the
money in the funds that do the better job, according to them,
more money for space, and LESS for congress, regulation,
and the IRS?  That's interesting, how will the IRS survive?)
-- 
 o   O   from the pyrolagnic keyboard of
   ~              rabbit!jj
 -v-v-
 \^_^/