Anti-war, hippies and deadbeats unite
A group calling themselves the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee is urging Americans who oppose defending innocent Iraqis from being murdered by terrorists to stop paying any taxes in order to send a message to the government. They mention, briefly, that there may be consequences, and then provide a link to another site which provides more information, that in essence attempts to assure the would-be protestor that such consequences are trivial and worth the effort.
These are basically mind-numbed Liberals that put symbolism over substance and would rather use a fruitless act of symbolic opposition than actually to anything substantive to further their agenda. We can be grateful so many Liberals are like that.
However it occurred to me that were they really interested in preventing the government from using their taxes for the war, there's another approach that, while probably difficult to obtain, would be more honest, as well as democratic. And that explains two reasons why they'd oppose it.
What if the IRS provided a little box on the 1040 forms that said, "Check this box if you want none of your taxes to go to funding the US military". Of course, in fairness, next to that would need to be a box that said, "Check this if you want double the normal amount of your taxes to go to funding the US military."
Now the very first people to oppose such an idea would be the dimwits wanting to protest the war by withholding taxes because A. it means they don't get to keep what they withhold and B. it allows others to have a larger percentage of their taxes to go for the military.
The government wouldn't be terribly keen on the idea because it would then take the budget and put part of it under direct democratic (the democratic process not the Democrat party) control. They would complain that other issues and budget items could then make it onto the tax forms, making the budget process a nightmare. Personally, I think that'd be a great idea as long as it didn't make the tax forms too complicated. The idea is that these choices are voluntary, so most Americans would simply not bother with them.
But what if they did, also, offer that choice for social programs? Would that be a bad idea? Those who oppose government spending for social programs could have their taxes go where they want, and those who think there should be more spending on social programs could have their taxes targeting that. The budgeting process would then be more influenced by the actual will of the people rather than the questionable motive of politicians.
Ironically, I'm guessing the Democrat Party would be a more vigorous opponent of such a democratization of the government budget, while the Republicans party would be more likely to actually give it some thought.
Sadly, while we actually do have something like this already, the only choice it allows you is whether or not you want $3 of your taxes to go toward the campaigns of those running for President.
But please, discuss it among yourselves.
Posted by Danny Carlton at July 5, 2007 9:04 AM