Go check out today's E.V. Tribune. There's an op-ed by a guy named Rich Shields (Intellectuals Not Smartest Folks In Room) who attempts to make the truly tired argument that conservatives are smarter than "intellectual liberals." First of all, that's preposterous because there is no such thing as an "intellectual conservative," especially this guy.
That being said, it is entertaining to see someone who teaches economics at the DeVry Institute's Keller School of Management (only accredited though something close to osmosis) lecturing people who teach at real colleges and universities about not being as smart as conservatives. One must have a certain amount of chutzpah to criticize them for the exact thing he is asking the reader to do: believe he is an authority on anything.
If you want examples of Peter Pan and Neverland, you don’t have to look much further than Mr. Shields beloved conservatives. Only people in Neverland think the massive Republican federal deficit is a good thing, that we’re winning the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, or that Arizona’s last-place ranking in Education is an achievement.
As for the argument that conservatives see government as “an institution in the pursuit of self-interest,” I guess they would know. All one has to do is read the paper about folks like Republican Congressman Rick Renzi who appears to have used his authority to broker a sweet land swap deal or neocon Paul Wolfowitz breaking ethics rules to give his girlfriend a big raise, or Dick Cheney giving no-bid billion dollar contracts to his former firm Halliburton. Sounds rather self-serving to me, Rich. Give me people who can think any day.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Monday, May 07, 2007
Who's Your Buddy Now?
I’ve been trying to make sense of how Arizona tax policy is framed for a while now and Saturday’s Arizona Federation of Taxpayers Association (AFTA) Defending the American Dream Conference helped me finalize my opinion: tax policy in Arizona is driven by ideology and theoretical economics and has precious little to do with the practical use of tax dollars. I couldn’t attend the entire program, but from the opening remarks through the first session it was clear to me that the legislators and AFTA leadership have little interest in taking into account the needs of the state and have only one goal: cut taxes regardless of the impact on the state now or in the future.
Don’t get me wrong. No one “likes” paying taxes, particularly high ones (which we don’t have in Arizona). But to ignore practical spending issues just to say you cut taxes is irresponsible in a growing state, especially in light of this year’s $600M tax cut and when raising taxes is almost impossible. Legislators who pledge to cut taxes while ignoring the demands of an increasing population cannot be called “friends of the taxpayer.” On the contrary, they are “Penny-wise and Pound foolish.” Their actions will cost Arizona much more in the future to deal with problems they choose to ignore today. If anything, they’re friends of mediocrity and enemies of progress.
Let’s start with their mantra: “Can government spend your money better than you can?” When this question was asked people booed, which would be expected. But the practical question of “spend money on what?” was never asked. Can government spend money on roads better than I can? Sure. I can’t afford them. How about car insurance? There I think I have an edge. What about Veteran’s care? Government wins on that one. My point is when you beg answers to questions that are grossly over-simplified, people do not think about the consequences of the instinctive “I can spend my money better than government.”
The simple truth is that in a modern society government has responsibilities and capacities that individuals do not. Therefore, it is disingenuous to argue that all government spending is bad when there is no other entity that could undertake the effort or raise the funds that serve the public good. They will argue the private sector can do many of the things government can do, only better. If that’s true, then why haven’t they solved health care yet? Why is Arizona ranked last in education? Some things the private sector can do and some it can’t. But it, too, is irresponsible to suggest the private sector is always the answer.
The three legislators on the morning panel (Jack Harper, Kirk Adams and Thayer Verschoor) agreed upon the need for an additional tax cut in the current budget. Why? As explained by Verschoor, we need to stimulate the economy. Isn’t Arizona the fastest growing state in the country? What exactly do we need to stimulate and why, Senator? Do we need revenue for something? Like maybe for schools and health care for children as the result of population growth? If so, then why cut taxes when we know revenues will be lower for the next few years due to the drop in real estate values? There will be less money to work with. Wouldn’t the prudent economic policy be not to mess with revenues? That’s like having a growing family where the kids keep coming and to cover the increased spending requirements the parents take jobs paying less money. What sense does that make? But no one asks these questions. Just cut taxes, they say. It is this lack of curiosity and reason that makes for bad tax policy.
I understand AFTA’s goal. I understand why some legislators want their endorsement. But keeping a tax cut pledge made to lobbyists just to get an endorsement seems contrary to the implicit promise of responsible budget management made to the voters. Our legislators should be asking practical questions to make sure the actions they take are fiscally sound instead of being slaves to a political ideology. Arizonans deserve better than the budget automatons we have now. These are “friends” Arizona’s future can do without.
Don’t get me wrong. No one “likes” paying taxes, particularly high ones (which we don’t have in Arizona). But to ignore practical spending issues just to say you cut taxes is irresponsible in a growing state, especially in light of this year’s $600M tax cut and when raising taxes is almost impossible. Legislators who pledge to cut taxes while ignoring the demands of an increasing population cannot be called “friends of the taxpayer.” On the contrary, they are “Penny-wise and Pound foolish.” Their actions will cost Arizona much more in the future to deal with problems they choose to ignore today. If anything, they’re friends of mediocrity and enemies of progress.
Let’s start with their mantra: “Can government spend your money better than you can?” When this question was asked people booed, which would be expected. But the practical question of “spend money on what?” was never asked. Can government spend money on roads better than I can? Sure. I can’t afford them. How about car insurance? There I think I have an edge. What about Veteran’s care? Government wins on that one. My point is when you beg answers to questions that are grossly over-simplified, people do not think about the consequences of the instinctive “I can spend my money better than government.”
The simple truth is that in a modern society government has responsibilities and capacities that individuals do not. Therefore, it is disingenuous to argue that all government spending is bad when there is no other entity that could undertake the effort or raise the funds that serve the public good. They will argue the private sector can do many of the things government can do, only better. If that’s true, then why haven’t they solved health care yet? Why is Arizona ranked last in education? Some things the private sector can do and some it can’t. But it, too, is irresponsible to suggest the private sector is always the answer.
The three legislators on the morning panel (Jack Harper, Kirk Adams and Thayer Verschoor) agreed upon the need for an additional tax cut in the current budget. Why? As explained by Verschoor, we need to stimulate the economy. Isn’t Arizona the fastest growing state in the country? What exactly do we need to stimulate and why, Senator? Do we need revenue for something? Like maybe for schools and health care for children as the result of population growth? If so, then why cut taxes when we know revenues will be lower for the next few years due to the drop in real estate values? There will be less money to work with. Wouldn’t the prudent economic policy be not to mess with revenues? That’s like having a growing family where the kids keep coming and to cover the increased spending requirements the parents take jobs paying less money. What sense does that make? But no one asks these questions. Just cut taxes, they say. It is this lack of curiosity and reason that makes for bad tax policy.
I understand AFTA’s goal. I understand why some legislators want their endorsement. But keeping a tax cut pledge made to lobbyists just to get an endorsement seems contrary to the implicit promise of responsible budget management made to the voters. Our legislators should be asking practical questions to make sure the actions they take are fiscally sound instead of being slaves to a political ideology. Arizonans deserve better than the budget automatons we have now. These are “friends” Arizona’s future can do without.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)