Tea Party lacks plans on running a society without taxes
As the son of a retail fabric merchant, one of the pointless memories from my youth was watching the guy in the warehouse estimate yardage by holding one end of the questioned fabric in his fully extended left hand while turning his head to the right and using his nose as the point for a one yard measurement. And it worked - at least for rough estimates and for some of the time. Just don’t bet the farm on its accuracy.
And now in our kitchen, by replacing measurements of “a pinch,” “a dollop,” and “a handful” with “a teaspoon,” “a tablespoon” and “a cup,” my wife’s brownies and apricot coffee cakes are more likely to be mind-boggling than merely outstanding.
All of this emphasizes the need for standards by which to plan our efforts and our future rather than simply using gut-feelings of good or bad or possible. And nowhere is the need for thorough, realistic planning more consequential than in planning the rules and regulations by which to govern our nation.
And that is the trouble with our current approach to the basic problems of governance. We tend to start by choosing between our personal pleasures and aversions, then designing our nation’s future according to those prejudices. But that just won’t work.
The Tea Party, for example, is gaining strength on the basis of the fears they project or the Nirvana they fantasize. They are against big government and big budgets, but voice nothing more substantive than slogans of hope and hate. Their most unifying anger is the discomfort of taxes and their most motivating fear is of future tax increases, but they offer no alternative source of funding beyond doing without.
They have no plan or analysis of how society might work without the assistance of taxes to fund our police and fire departments, or to keep our highway system intact and military strong, or how to keep our libraries and public education up to date and operating. In short, they have no idea of what comes next, and no vision of what the future might portend.
There must be an identifiable set of principles by which to build our nation and measure our progress - a measurement more substantive than simply not liking taxes. Otherwise, decisions for all our society and our children and the future of our nation will be made according to the short-term personal idiosyncrasies of those who are charged with planning and enforcement rather than by the ideals, which should be our guide.
And we do have such a guide, the original one embedded in the introduction to our Constitution. Unfortunately, for much of our more conservative electorate, notably the Tea Party, that guide to our national purpose and character seems to be overlooked or dismissed as grossly outdated. The Preamble, they will note, has not a single reference to excessive taxation, nor does it mention gay marriage or welfare mothers or abortion rights.
Nor, of course, should it. The Preamble is concerned with the direction and obligations of our society, with the goals and aspirations of our society. It is those goals that define our nation - the goals, not the tactics of achieving them - that make us unique in all world history. If our taxes are too high or our programs inefficient or our views outdated, then correct them - revise them - improve them. But we must not just dismiss them, allowing them to fade as a consequence of disinterest or oversight.
Many of our people are so offended by taxes that they simply disregard the national pain and hardship serious tax reductions would generate, focusing instead on that single source of discomfort. Rather than retreating into our cocoon of comfort we should perhaps struggle to improve the efficiency of our system - not abandon all the glory that had been ours and that had once defined us. The ever-widening space between our nation’s needy and ourselves, our decreasing concern with the welfare of neighbors who are not family, is a dangerous symptom of our decline.
Robert Faber Ann Arbor
Comments
Judd Hammond
Tue, Mar 23, 2010 : 1:59 p.m.
Taxes and the Tea Party; Please inform yourself, and others about a bill that has been in front of Congress for a few years. Simply, first, IT REPEALS THE INCOME TAX! It THEN replaces it with a national sales tax. There are at least two books written about this proposal, so I'll not write a third. But think, the USA becomes a TAX HAVEN! Economic growth, revenue from the underground economy, etc.. Read the book The Fair Tax by Neal Boortz. Fair tax.org
brad
Tue, Mar 16, 2010 : 2:28 p.m.
As a voting Democrat, I love the Tea Party. First, it will siphon 5-10%. Second, the GOP will lurch to the right and leave the center open for the Dems...if they're smart enough to take it. @Diag, 3 phrases come to mind: Economies of scale, death spiral, and diminishing returns. First, 50 different programs are less efficient than 1, though I'm not arguing that efficiency is great all the time. Second, if MI doesn't have the cash to maintain it's infrastructure, it's hard to escape economically. Maybe the tides are turned in 20 years. Third, Kennedy and Reagan dropped the top rate from 90%-70%-30%. The benefit won't be as great if you drop it another 10%.
David Briegel
Tue, Mar 16, 2010 : 9:15 a.m.
Diagenes, you left out a couple of facts. The Tea Party movements seems only to be concerned with spending that helps our fellow citizens. I have never heard the Mad Hatters discuss the Perpetual War Profiteering or the fraud, waste and abuse in our military spending. Ron Paul does but not the Dick Armey crowd. I haven't heard them demand accountability for the theft on Wall Street either. They just seem to be against helping real live people while ignoring some obvious fraud, waste and abuse.
Diagenes
Tue, Mar 16, 2010 : 7:39 a.m.
Mr. Faber, Your article highlights the core debate in America today. Big government politicians, both left and right want to use government to control the people and use the tax code and revenue to gain and hold political power. The Tea Party movement believes in individual responsibility and states rights. (See the 10th amendment). If a state wants a bridge to "nowhere" let that state fund it. When the Stadium Blvd. bridge needs to be repaired, don't ask people in Alaska to kick in tax dollars to fix it. That's OUR responsibility. Reasonable people agree that taxes are a necessary part of public finance. Its the use and level of taxes that we can argue about. Kennedy, Reagan and Bush demonstrated that lower tax rates will increase the economy and produce higher tax collections. A lesson lost on the current administration. The problem that we have is that politicians will spend ALL tax revenue and borrow more to support their political allies. The Tea Party wants to stop the endless cycle of tax, borrow, and spend on unproductive programs and political favors.
David Briegel
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 10:05 p.m.
Hank Paulson is a leftist? He and he alone demanded that the free market be damned because AIG was too big to fail. Mainly because his old firm Goldman Sachs got over 10% of the bailout! Free market indeed! Those evil, leftist billionaires!!! And not one single person wants these criminals in prison where they belong.
Hot Sam
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 8:42 p.m.
""" How's that free market workin'? """ What free market? The left has been eliminating that for some time...
David Briegel
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 12:30 p.m.
mike, sure beats talking about the bankers, insurance companies and war profiteers, eh? Is thievery better than wastefulness? You mean like bridge to nowhere arrogance? Borrow and spend arrogance? How's that free market workin'?
mike from saline
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 10:30 a.m.
It realy dosn't matter what the subject is, David Briegel is alowed to post the same rant over, and over.
Janelle Baranowski
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.
I don't think anyone in the Tea Party would argue that complete elimination of taxes is the way forward. I would like to see the author attend a Tea Party meeting before bashing the movement.
Top Cat
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 7:41 a.m.
Those that trivialize and sneer at the Tea Party Movement have the same arrogance and tone deafness as those currently in power in Washington. They will wake up on the morning of November 3 and not know what hit them.
David Briegel
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 5:01 a.m.
If we weren't bailing out the billionaire criminals who foolishly lost fortunes and still borrow money from us at 0% to pay themselves "bonuses" for bankrupting their businesses we could afford anything. If we weren't slaves to the Perpetual War Profiteers, we could afford anything. Ever wonder where organized crime has gone? Banking, Insurance, War Profiteering!! Criminal Enterprises All and they rent our govt from right under our noses while we argue about abortion and gay marriage and Communism/Socialism/Marxism when in the real world Fascism is encroaching! Funny how we are so concerned about the money "wasted" while so little concern is shown for the money that is "stolen"! I guess theft by billionaires is American. As far as I have seen the Tea Party is just the Mad Hatters!!
Larry S
Mon, Mar 15, 2010 : 2:42 a.m.
Tough times always brings out the crackpots. That's all there is to the so-called Tea Party movement.
Hot Sam
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 7:37 p.m.
If throwing money at societal problems solved them, we wouldn't have any. Techno is correct...the federal government is out of control. The writer has no clue as to what the tea party movement is about. The fact is, if we had the money we waste in Washington, we could have the things he desires.
Technojunkie
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 3:52 p.m.
You're still misreading the Constitution, as did FDR and his numerous anti-Constitutional acts. Maybe this will give you some historical context: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/ellis1.html
Robert Faber
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 2:23 p.m.
Sadly, Tony Dearing misread my comments. The Constitution does not deal with specifics, which is part of its power and its beauty. Its concern is with principles, a key one of which is the welfare of the People. FDRs recognition of the nations depression-era failure in leaving onethird of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished, for example, noted that Government is competent [only] when all who compose it work... for the whole people. Disputes will arise about what constitutes the welfare of the People and about how best to achieve it, but starting off with a discussion of the mechanics of performance such as funding rather than an analysis of what constitutes the peoples Welfare is the path to evasion of principles rather than a search for its values. Bob Faber
clara
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 12:23 p.m.
Since the Tea Party movement is truly a grassroots up organization it does not have a formal platform. Some say: We believe in Limited Government, Free Speech, the 2nd Amendment, our Military, Secure Borders and our Country. And secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets. we support states' rights for those powers not expressly stated in the Constitution. As the government is of the people, by the people and for the people, in all other matters we support the personal liberty of the individual, within the rule of law. we support a return to the free market principles on which this nation was founded and oppose government intervention into the operations of private business. We are united in our common belief in Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets. This threefold purpose is the source of our unity in the Tea Party Movement. We reject the idea that the Tea Party Movement must all be unanimous in our specific policy views in order to win. We recognize that the current situation requires we come together in confederation to achieve the MANY MUTUAL GOALS we all seek to accomplish.
John Galt
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 11:45 a.m.
The "progessives" (code speak for communists) will not be satisfied until we are all serfs. Already we are slaves for 50+% of our wages. We can do with much less "services" and much more personal accountability.
Technojunkie
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 11:25 a.m.
Read the Constitution again, then tell us where the Constitution authorizes the federal government to have a federal Department of Education, Housing, to fund welfare programs, run Social Security and Medicare, etc, etc. Police, fire and schools, those basics of government that you cite, are state and local issues to be funded at those levels. Look at how long the federal government ran without such bureaucratic monstrosities before progressives got a hold of it in the early 20th century.
stunhsif
Sun, Mar 14, 2010 : 8:01 a.m.
Same old tired liberalism that is out of touch with reality. Was not suprised at all after reading the letter that it was from Robert Faber. I have been reading his "letters to the editor" for years. He needs to take off his rose colored glasses and attend to the roses that are dying because of failed liberal policy. "Rather than retreating into our cocoon of comfort"?? Yeah Robert, we are all just a bunch of selfish conservatives that hate our neighbors, give me a break! "The Preamble, has not a single reference to excessive taxation,nor does it mention gay marriage or welfare mothers or abortion rights". You have got to be kidding me Robert, you are way out of touch. This country's sense of entitlement, that is what is yours is really mine is killing us. Even 100 years ago, (don't have to go back 200+) if you didn't work, you didn't eat. Family took care of family, friends helped out friends. Government has created the nanny state, I've seen it in my own family. Conservatives are not against taxation Robert. We are for reasonable ( not ever increasing) taxation and want our tax money spent on what the founding fathers said it should be spent on and that would not include abortion. If you feel you are not being taxed enough, please send Mr. Obama some more of your money or drop off a check at A2 city hall.