MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘taxpayers’

How America’s Military-Industrial Complex Wins All of Its Wars Against America’s Taxpayers

Posted by M. C. on June 22, 2024

https://archive.is/H9ALj#selection-1153.0-1229.508

by Eric Zuesse

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.

Eric Zuesse (blogs at https://theduran.com/author/eric-zuesse/)

As has been documented by such authorities on U.S. military spending as Winslow T. Wheeler, Robert Higgs, and others, America spends each year around $1.5 trillion for its military but hides at least around $800 billion of it (so as for the U.S. not to be publicly recognized as spending half of this entire planet’s military expenses) by spending it from other federal Departments than the Defense Department; or, “The US National Security Budget for 2023/24 is approximately $1.5 Trillion”, as Wheeler headlined a year ago, on 1 May 2023. He detailed there how approximately $800 billion of that $1.5T was budgeted as being from the Veterans Affairs Department ($320.8 billion, all of that for the military), Homeland Security Department ($103.2B for the military), Treasury Department ($78.2B+$13.1B=$88.3B for the military), State Department ($46.4B for the military), Energy Department ($35.7B for the military), Justice Department & others ($12.1B for the military), plus $146.0B national security share of interest on the federal debt. All of that non-‘Defense’ Department U.S. Government military spending totaled to $752.5B. He also mentioned “Supplementals” as then being “To come”; and, now, as-of the 19 April 2024 House passage (“Roll Call 142 | Bill Number: H. Res. 1160”) of the procedural motion “On agreeing to the resolution Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: 316 – 94 (Roll no. 142)” so innocuously titled as to hide the dirty deed that they had just done, it added $26.38B to support Israel’s annihilation and/or expulsion of the 2.3 million Gazans, plus $60.84B to extend Ukraine’s war at least until President Biden becomes re-elected, plus $8.12 billion to encourage and support the leaders of Taiwan to declare Taiwan’s independence from China (of which it currently is a Province) so that the U.S. Government will have won Taiwan and would then need to invade China in order to defend from China that new U.S. colony (‘ally’). The “Supplemental” this year (Ukraine+Gaza+Taiwan) totals to $95.3B, which causes the original $886B ‘Defense’ (or Aggression) budget for this fiscal year to be:

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Parasitic Rich Men North of Richmond | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 20, 2023

“The tax recipient class is not the product of voluntary exchange nor is it providing value to consumers; it is the parasite on the productive class of society. What the productive class provides to the average man, the parasitic class takes through violence. It does not need to provide value to the average man nor is it receptive to the market price system—it is accountable only to the voting populace after years of its parasitism. This parasitic class provides no value, only extracting it from the better members of society.”

“Anthony’s “rich men” are this parasitic class.”

https://mises.org/wire/parasitic-rich-men-north-richmond

David Brady, Jr.

Seemingly coming out of nowhere was the song “Rich Men North of Richmond,” by singer-songwriter Oliver Anthony. Overnight, the laments of one man from Appalachia over the state of the American economy and government spread like wildfire.

In “Rich Men North of Richmond” Anthony decries the declining value of the US dollar, the lack of accountability for those on Jeffrey Epstein’s client list, and the use of taxpayer dollars to fund obesity through food stamps amidst high taxation. Whilst one could deconstruct the individual issues pointed at by Anthony, it can best be understood by the song title and the chorus:

Livin’ in the new world

With an old soul

These rich men north of Richmond

Lord knows they all just wanna have total control

Wanna know what you think, wanna know what you do

And they don’t think you know, but I know that you do

‘Cause your dollar ain’t shit and it’s taxed to no end

‘Cause of rich men north of Richmond

The song is a lament about the poor state of America at the hands of these “rich men north of Richmond.” These men, of course, are none other than the politicians and bureaucrats of Washington, DC. Any libertarian worth their salt can both empathize and sympathize with the message. Government bureaucrats and politicians have racked up $32 trillion of debt (not including unfunded liabilities), have become involved in at least seven foreign wars since September 11, 2001, and devalued the dollar by more than 90 percent since 1913. It has hardly been easy to be in the working class since the advent of progressivism.

The explosion of Anthony’s song is a fitting time to discuss libertarian class theory, which provides insight into the very problems of these “rich men” and how they have led to the plundering of productive citizenry.

The first proper articulation of libertarian class theory is in Murray Rothbard’s book For a New Liberty, where he applies the theory of John C. Calhoun. This theory is that of the most basic conflict because of government: between those who are net “taxpayers” and those who are net “tax receivers.” The net taxpayers are, of course, those who are expropriated through taxation. They are the productive ranks of society, who fall victim to the contradictorily named “progressive income tax.” They are those who receive less in benefit than they pay into the system.

The other side to this class distinction are the net “tax receivers” or “tax recipients.” These are those who generate their income from the state taxation apparatus: the politicians, the bureaucrats, government contractors, and propaganda class. These are the corporations that not only build and maintain the road apparatus but also the dreaded military-industrial complex and other various industries.

The university system, feeding off subsidies through federal student loans, would be another such industry. These industries survive not through a marketplace of free exchange but through government handouts. Politicians might be the most easily identifiable member of this class, taking not only a salary but also other benefits that come with controlling the monopoly on violence.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Taxpayers Bailed Out Yellow Trucking. It Went Bankrupt Anyway. | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on August 15, 2023

Despite having two board seats, the Teamsters accept no blame in Yellow’s downfall.

https://mises.org/wire/taxpayers-bailed-out-yellow-trucking-it-went-bankrupt-anyway

Doug French

After ninety-nine years in business, Yellow, one of the nation’s biggest trucking companies, shut down. The company has more than twelve thousand trucks and employed thirty thousand, with twenty-two thousand of those jobs held by Teamsters.

If you are a taxpayer, you know all this, your government being a 29.6 percent shareholder of Yellow and all. The Trump administration’s Coronavirus, Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act dished out $500 billion to businesses, states and municipalities as a result of the coronavirus. Yellow Corporation received $700 million of the $735.9 million set aside for national security loans.

The loan had two tranches, tranche A was $300 million to cover union healthcare and pension liabilities, plus lease and interest payments. Tranche B was for tractors and trailers. Interest for tranche A was the London interbank offered rate (LIBOR) plus 3.5 percent (1.5 percent of it to be paid in cash and 2.0 percent in kind) and interest for tranche B was LIBOR plus 3.5 percent (all cash). These attractive terms are the reason the government required equity in the firm as a condition of the loan.

“Since the CARES Act did not define the term ‘business critical to maintaining national security,’ the Treasury had virtually unfettered discretion to define this term,” says a special report of the Congressional Oversight Commission that investigated the loan.

Back in 2020, the Defense Department figured other trucking companies could replace Yellow’s government work should the company go out of business, so the department was going to recommend a no to issuing the loan. But “one day after Defense Department officials notified the Treasury that the Defense Department would likely not certify Yellow as critical to maintaining national security, the Treasury requested an urgent call with Secretary Esper, which took place on June 26, 2020.” After Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin called the defense secretary, “Esper certified Yellow as critical to maintaining national security the same day as the call, June 26, 2020, and the Treasury finalized the loan to Yellow on July 7, 2020.”

According to the Wall Street Journal, “Esper declined to comment. He has previously said he made the certification at the recommendation of Pentagon staff.”

According to the special report, Yellow spent $570,000 on lobbying in 2020 but nothing the year before. The company had been in close touch with the White House and “had discussed how the company employs 24,000 drivers who are part of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“Teamsters”) union.”

Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa allegedly “had reached out to the Trump administration and . . . was seeking a meeting with the Secretary of Defense to advocate for Yellow’s national security loan application.”

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Taxpayers Spend More To Prop Up Government Than They Do On Themselves – Issues & Insights

Posted by M. C. on September 18, 2021

https://issuesinsights.com/2021/09/17/taxpayers-spend-more-to-prop-up-government-than-they-do-on-themselves/

I & I Editorial Board

One would think that in a nation founded on liberty that we’d be free to spend more on personal consumption than the government takes from us. But that’s not the case. Americans are paying more in taxes than they spend on themselves. Anyone who thinks this is healthy has a profoundly warped sense of right and wrong.

In 2020, according to Terence P. Jeffrey at CNS News, who did the arithmetic using Bureau of Labor Statistics data, American “consumer units” – a BLS term – “spent a net total of $17,211.12 on taxes” sent to Washington, state capitals, and local halls of government. Meanwhile, they spent “only $16,839.89 on food, clothing, health care and entertainment combined.”

Apparently the tribute paid to government isn’t enough. Americans just have to “give” more. The Biden administration is expecting to extract trillions more from us to pay for government programs it hopes will cement a permanent Democratic majority in Washington. We’re told that the agenda will be paid for by hiking taxes on the rich, but the reality is, “in the end, average Americans, not the rich,” will have to “pick up the tab.”

A few on the left who are more honest about the plans and the worldview that informs those schemes will make the claim that every penny earned belongs to government, and we’re allowed to keep some of it for ourselves because government is a kind and charitable institution. Americans are certainly free to hold that opinion. But not one of them has the moral right to put such a perverted idea into practice.

Yet it happens every day. Politicians, not all but enough to engage in large-scale racketeering, believe the dollars they rob without a conscience from Americans belong to them.

It’s discouraging that the majority of lawmakers in this country don’t have the same understanding of taxation that 19th century French economist Frederic Bastiat did. He called it “legal plunder.”

Yes, we understand that the federal government needs financial resources to meet its constitutional obligations. It’s the same at the state and local levels – money is needed to fund government functions. But government functions have far exceeded the limits that define government in a truly free society, and the need for more money to fund them is far outstripping any legitimate need.

Few would be complaining about taxes in 2021 if the federal income was still a two‐​page form with two instruction pages, and a top rate of 6%, as it was when it first appeared in 1913 after passage of the 16th Amendment. In that initial year of revenue, 1914, the income tax took in $10 billion in today’s dollars. Now it takes more $2 trillion a year from Americans.

Of course we’re hit with a long list of additional taxes, all of them adding up to a burden no free man and woman should ever pay. If the trend continues, we’ll in the not too distant future be paying more to government than food, clothing, health care, entertainment and housing. There’s no future in that.

— Written by the I&I Editorial Board

Will You Help Us In The Fight For Free Speech?

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day — without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren’t afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Quantifying The “Staggering Costs” Of US Military Equipment Left Behind In Afghanistan | ZeroHedge

Posted by M. C. on August 24, 2021

You get your people and your stuff out first. Shouldn’t be that tough for a superpower.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/quantifying-staggering-costs-us-military-equipment-left-behind-afghanistan

Tyler Durden's Photoby Tyler Durden

Authored by Adam Andrzejewski via Forbes.com,

The U.S. provided an estimated $83 billion worth of training and equipment to Afghan security forces since 2001. This year, alone, the U.S. military aid to Afghan forces was $3 billion.

Putting price tags on American military equipment still in Afghanistan isn’t an easy task. In the fog of war – or withdrawal – Afghanistan has always been a black box with little sunshine.

Not helping transparency, the Biden Administration is now hiding key audits on Afghan military equipment. This week, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com reposted two key reports on the U.S. war chest of military gear in Afghanistan that had disappeared from federal websites.

#1. Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit of U.S. provided military gear in Afghanistan (August 2017): reposted report (dead link: report).

#2. Special Inspector General For Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) audit of $174 million in lost ScanEagle drones (July 2020): reposted report (dead link: report).

U.S. taxpayers paid for these audits and the U.S.-provided equipment and should be able to follow the money.

After publication, the GAO spokesman responded to our request for comment, “the State Department requested we temporarily remove and review reports on Afghanistan to protect recipients of US assistance that may be identified through our reports and thus subject to retribution.” However, these reports only have numbers and no recipient information.

Furthermore, unless noted, when estimating “acquisition value,” our source is the Department Logistics Agency (DLA) and their comprehensive databases of military equipment.

The U.S. provided an estimated $83 billion worth of training and equipment to Afghan security forces since 2001. This year, alone, the U.S. military aid to Afghan forces was $3 billion.

Putting price tags on American military equipment still in Afghanistan isn’t an easy task. In the fog of war – or withdrawal – Afghanistan has always been a black box with little sunshine.

Not helping transparency, the Biden Administration is now hiding key audits on Afghan military equipment. This week, our auditors at OpenTheBooks.com reposted two key reports on the U.S. war chest of military gear in Afghanistan that had disappeared from federal websites.

#1. Government Accountability Office (GAO) audit of U.S. provided military gear in Afghanistan (August 2017): reposted report (dead link: report).

#2. Special Inspector General For Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) audit of $174 million in lost ScanEagle drones (July 2020): reposted report (dead link: report).

U.S. taxpayers paid for these audits and the U.S.-provided equipment and should be able to follow the money.

After publication, the GAO spokesman responded to our request for comment, “the State Department requested we temporarily remove and review reports on Afghanistan to protect recipients of US assistance that may be identified through our reports and thus subject to retribution.” However, these reports only have numbers and no recipient information.

Furthermore, unless noted, when estimating “acquisition value,” our source is the Department Logistics Agency (DLA) and their comprehensive databases of military equipment.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Public Schools Refuse to Open. Give the Taxpayers Their Money Back | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on March 6, 2021

By last fall, it was already apparent that private schools were much more concerned with providing in-person services than were the public schools. As Time reported last August, parents were picking up on the fact that if students were to receive an in-person education, it was probably going to happen at a private school. Moreover, most Catholic schools remain open and offer in-person instruction. In Philadelphia, for example, the archdiocese’s more than a hundred elementary schools have returned to a five-day-per-week schedule. Also, “there’s been no in-school transmission” of covid-19. In Boston, Catholic schools opened while public schools dithered.

https://mises.org/wire/public-schools-refuse-open-give-taxpayers-their-money-back

Ryan McMaken

In many school districts across the nation, public school teachers still don’t want to go back to work. Private sector workers have long been hard at work in kitchens, at construction sites, and in hardware and grocery stores. Meanwhile, from Seattle, to Los Angeles, and to Berkeley, California, Teachers’ Union representatives insist they simply can’t be expected to perform the on-site work in the expensive facilities that the taxpayers have long been paying for.

This week, for example, some schoolteachers in Colorado’s Jefferson County turned out to protest the district’s plan to return to limited in-person learning later this month. These protestors still insist it’s unsafe, even though the very institutions these people have long parroted in favor of endless lockdowns—the CDC and the World Health Organization, for instance—say reopening schools should be a “top priority.” Moreover, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine have concluded “The lower risk of transmission of the virus by younger children and reported milder or moderate illness in this age group suggest the appropriateness of in-person instruction for primary and elementary grades.”

But that’s not good enough for public school teachers. So, in many cases, parents who actually want or need to send their students to an in-person school must go to the private sector instead. The government schools in these places can’t be bothered, but the private schools are racing to serve the public. 

The most absurd aspect of all this is that even when public schools effectively tell parents and students to “get lost,” taxpayers still have to pony up the cash to pay for the public schools. If any private sector industry tried to function this way, it would be denounced in no uncertain terms. But it doesn’t happen this way because in the private sector—unlike the public schools—business owners and employees don’t get paid if they refuse to work. In other words, the customers can take their money and leave. 

This disconnect between the taxpaying public and the public schools has always existed, of course, but the covid-19 panic has made it far more obvious to the general public. The time has come to finally allow parents and taxpayers to pull their money out of these unresponsive and expensive boondoggles.

Private Schools Are Mostly Back in Business

Compare the public school reaction to that of private schools.

By last fall, it was already apparent that private schools were much more concerned with providing in-person services than were the public schools. As Time reported last August, parents were picking up on the fact that if students were to receive an in-person education, it was probably going to happen at a private school. Moreover, most Catholic schools remain open and offer in-person instruction. In Philadelphia, for example, the archdiocese’s more than a hundred elementary schools have returned to a five-day-per-week schedule. Also, “there’s been no in-school transmission” of covid-19. In Boston, Catholic schools opened while public schools dithered. The local public radio outlet reports:

It’s a stark contrast, one that’s made Catholic schools attractive to families fed up with remote learning and willing to pay for in-person instruction.

The schools’ administrators do not know of a single case of anyone being hospitalized as a result of transmission through these schools.

This is a fairly common experience for Catholic schools. In the archdiocese of Denver, schools were “100 percent open” beginning last fall, and

less than one percent of students and less than four percent of the staff members test positive over the entire fall semester – numbers that are less than overall positivity rate for children and the general population. 

Defenders of the public schools’ lackluster efforts have attempted to explain all this away by claiming private schools are just the domain of the wealthy. Many articles point to the tuition rates of boutique schools, like the Germantown Friends school in Pennsylvania, which charges more than $40,000 per year.

This, however, is an outlier. Many private schools charge far less than that. Yes, some Catholic schools—which are 37 percent of all private schools and comprise the largest nonpublic school system in America—are indeed expensive boutique schools run by “private orders.” But most Catholic schools are run-of-the-mill archdiocesan schools that charge under $9,000 per year for high schooling, and even less for elementary school. That may seem like a lot, but it’s well below what many public schools spend on educating each student. Moreover, anyone who is familiar with urban Catholic school knows that these schools hardly cater to the wealthy elites. This is largely because of extensive scholarship programs for lower-income families.

These hapless parents who have been driven to private schooling by the public schools’ Covid shutdowns have to pay twice—once for the public schooling that’s been reduced to Zoom meetings, and once for the actual schooling taking place at private schools. 

What If We Ran Grocery Stores like Public Schools?

The private sector could never get away with this. 

Just imagine, for example, if grocery stores functioned this way and that grocery stores were government-owned institutions. Funding would come from tax revenues and funding levels would be calculated on the assumption that at least 90 percent of consumers would obtain all their groceries through these stores.1 Taxpayers would be charged accordingly. Just as state governments now spend 20 to 40 percent of state budgets on public schools, state governments would budget a sizable portion of the budget to “grocery finance.” Naturally, taxes would be much higher than they are now. Moreover, since taxes would be much higher—and posttax income much lower—countless Americans would indeed shop at these government stores. They would likely do so even if the quality of the food were lower. “Hey, I already paid for it,” the thinking would go, “so I might as well shop there.” We’d be told these government grocery stores are indispensable. How could the poor buy groceries otherwise? Of course, your shopping list would have to meet the approval of grocery planners so as to fit within the budget. Don’t like the menu that the grocers have selected for you? Tough luck. 

Moreover, given the enthusiasm with which public school staff and officials have abandoned their usual work in the face of Covid, it’s easy to imagine a scenario in which government grocery services are even more limited in case of a public health scare.

Admittedly, like the schools, these grocery stores would probably not end all their services. They’d likely still allow some limited shopping. No nonemployees would be allowed to enter the stores, though. As with schoolteachers, these public sector grocery workers would insist that the grocery stores function under numerous restrictions, perhaps with fewer business hours, and even long weekend closures to allow for extensive cleaning. And why not? The staffers and managers will get paid no matter what. 

Yes, there would be some private sector grocery stores for those insist on shopping in person or “after hours.” If you want to shop for groceries elsewhere, you’ll just have to pay twice: once for the government stores, and a second time for your “private” groceries.

Grocery Vouchers, a.k.a. “Food Stamps”

If presented with the option of a world of fully government-owned grocery stores, many Americans would consider such a thing to be madness. And rightly so. 

Moreover, even when confronted with the question of whether or not low-income people can afford groceries, few advocate for a government takeover of grocery stores. Instead, the taxpayers tolerate funding a system of monthly grocery vouchers for households below a certain income level. These vouchers are commonly called “food stamps.”

Now, many people may take exception to food stamps as a boondoggle. But it’s also hard to deny that if voters and politicians are going to insist that low-income consumers be subsidized, this grocery voucher system is orders of magnitude better than an extensive system of government-owned grocery stores.

Yet why do so many Americans think a system of government-owned schools makes sense?

If the same commonsense thinking that prevents a government takeover of grocery stores were applied to schools, the situation would look very different. Schools would virtually all be private institutions. If a parent doesn’t want to “shop” at a particular school or school district by enrolling his child there, the parent need not spend any money there.

Of course, politicians and many voters would insist that something be done to subsidize education for low-income residents. With this, the less bad strategy is the grocery model: provide the educational version of food stamps for students. These funds aren’t tied to any institution or any government districts. They go where the consumers go. 

Meanwhile, so long as public schools continue to receive direct funding from government coffers—with no economic connection to consumer choice—the public schools won’t have to care what the public wants or needs. 

  • 1. Roughly 90 percent of all school-age children attend government schools. 

Author:

Contact Ryan McMaken

Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is a senior editor at the Mises Institute. Send him your article submissions for the Mises Wire and The Austrian, but read article guidelines first. Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado and was a housing economist for the State of Colorado. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

I Could Pay Off My $50k Student Loan in a Few Years—if Government Stopped Taking My Money – Foundation for Economic Education

Posted by M. C. on February 19, 2021

Because of the increased taxation in the US economy, the average American now works approximately 4 months out of the year to pay all of their taxes. That means 4 months out of the year I work for the federal government instead of working to pay off my student loans.

The definition of slavery.

https://fee.org/articles/i-could-pay-off-my-50k-student-loan-in-a-few-years-if-government-stopped-taking-my-money/

Holly  Jean Soto
Holly Jean Soto

Twelve-thousand dollars.

That’s how much the government will take out of my income this tax season. As a college graduate, I would have used this money to start tackling my over $50,000 of student debt.

But instead of using this money to pay off two of my student loans this year, the government gets to keep this tidy sum of my hard-earned money.

This is the sad truth for many college graduates, like myself, working full-time jobs and still finding it hard to manage basic daily needs like rent, food, gas, car insurance, health insurance, and the like. Many of us are left feeling like Rachel Green from Friends when we get our paychecks, saying: “who’s FICA? And why is he getting all my money?”

For student loan borrowers, an average of $12,000 a year saved would be transformative.

But instead, we are facing a true debt crisis for borrowers across all demographics and age groups making student debt the second highest consumer debt category in the US behind mortgage debt, according to Forbes. Total student loan debt amounted to $1.56 trillion last year alone.

Research also shows that “college graduates aged 35 and under with student loans now are spending nearly one-fifth (18 percent) of their current salaries on student loan payments and that 60 percent now expect to be paying off student loans into their 40s,” according to Citizens Bank.

As college debt becomes larger, it’s no wonder that more and more politicians are advocating student loan forgiveness programs.

But this tax season, I’m not asking for student loan forgiveness or a special government program to bail me out. I’m just asking to keep more of my hard-earned money.

I urge fellow student loan borrowers to imagine a world where you can keep all of your income and decide how to best spend your money. I would venture to guess that the majority of student borrowers would use this money to pay off their loans as fast as they can. Why? Because borrowers have an incentive to get out of debt.

Being debt free would be transformative for me! I would finally be able to move to my dream state, buy a house that I could design from scratch, help my parents pay off their mortgage, save for my future kids, donate more to my church, and accomplish the list of things I’ve written down for when I am debt free.

You see, when borrowers become debt free, their financial power changes drastically. They are more inclined to make major financial purchases like the ones I’ve shared.

Our rational self-interest to get out of debt frees up our ability to make major financial purchases which promote economic activity, benefiting the economy as a whole.

Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, discusses this idea of rational self-interest in his book, The Wealth of Nations, where he explains that the best economic benefit for all can be accomplished when individuals act on their self-interest.

Most of the economic activity we see around us is the result of self-interested behavior. The realtor selling my dream house acts on her own self-interest to build a salary to perhaps go on vacation. The workers cutting tile to fit in my new bathroom act on their own self-interest to build up savings and put a roof over their heads, the construction workers putting the house together act on their own self-interest to buy food for their families, and so on.

The beauty of rational self-interest is that it takes many self-interested people to work on one house, but as we all act on our self-interest, we inevitably serve one another and even more—produce economic activity that serves one another.

While using your income taxes to pay off your debt may be a rational and commendable spending decision, government’s spending decisions are oftentimes inefficient and ineffective.

Government’s track record of spending your taxpayer dollars is, well, horrid. GoBankingRates reports taxpayer dollars being used for things like studying monkey drool, examining how the world’s religions might react if humans make contact with aliens, having computers binge-watch hundreds of hours of television, proving that frat brothers like to party, putting fish on treadmills, and so much more. Governments’ poor spending habits have gotten so out of control that it’s put our nation in over $27 trillion dollars of debt.

So why do governments spending habits vary dramatically from individual spending habits?

Because incentives change when money comes out of your own pocket, versus the pockets of others. My favorite economics professor put it this way—“progress, efficiency and effectiveness don’t begin with someone else’s money.”

If we understand that individuals know better how to spend their own money than the government and that our spending decisions will help promote economic activity, why have we come to accept income taxes as normal?

Because of the increased taxation in the US economy, the average American now works approximately 4 months out of the year to pay all of their taxes. That means 4 months out of the year I work for the federal government instead of working to pay off my student loans.

If more college graduates were allowed to keep the dollars they earn, they would ultimately have the liberty to spend their money how they want —and get out of debt a whole lot faster.

But we need to keep more of our income to do this.

As we file our taxes this year, I encourage you to look at the amount of your money the government is claiming and ask yourself these two questions: what would you have done with this money? And does the government actually spend this money better than you can?

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Erie Times E-Edition Article-Erie County Community College gets $10M grant from Wolf

Posted by M. C. on December 26, 2020

A grant from Wolf! A Christmas gift! A bit misleading. A more accurate headline would be:

Governor Wolf allows Erie taxpayers to have a small portion of stolen dollars, theirs to begin with, back, instead of “redistributed” to someone else.

https://erietimes-pa-app.newsmemory.com/?publink=566d5f848

Matthew Rink Erie Times-News USA TODAY NETWORK

The Erie County Community College has received an early Christmas gift from Gov. Tom Wolf in the form of a $10 million Redevelopment Assistance Capital Project grant.

The grant money is the first funding allocated by the state to the new community college, which the Pennsylvania Board of Education approved in July. Plans call for the college to begin offering classes in the fall of 2021.

The community college was the largest project in Erie County to receive RACP funding. Nine other projects received a combined $13.5 million, of which $3 million was previously pledged.

See COLLEGE, Page 3A

Continued from Page 1A

The community college money will be used for capital costs, including the “acquisition, construction, renovation of property and buildings where classes would be held, as well as the machinery and equipment necessary for the operation of the college and education of students.”

“That’s great, it’s great,” said Ron DiNicola, the chairman of the community college’s board of trustees, upon hearing that the funding had been awarded. “I see it as a powerful indicator of the governor’s commitment to workforce development in Pennsylvania and his confidence in Erie County’s initiative to establish this college.”

DiNicola said he was finalizing the college’s request to the state for operating funds when he learned about the RACP award. Wolf is likely to put out his budget proposal for the coming fiscal year sometime in February. He indicated in October 2019 that the state would fund a 15th community college.

Erie County Executive Kathy Dahlkemper learned that the funding had come through around 3 p.m. Wednesday when she received a call from a member of Wolf’s staff. Wolf, she said, had told her prior to the state Board of Education approving the county’s request for a community college that he would provide extra funding through RACP.

“I’m obviously very grateful we have this funding and I’m just glad that the governor came through on his promise to me,” Dahlkemper said. “This is huge. This is money that’s going to allow for the eventual location of the community college to be purchased and for work to be done on that physical plant. It really helps make it a true reality for the Erie County community.”

The RACP funding was first included in the state budget in 2007 but like the county’s long-discussed plans for a community college, it sat idle. Erie County Council along with Dahlkemper agreed in 2017 to be the financial sponsor of the college and sent its proposal to the state for consideration.

The county will use its share of casino gaming revenue for the local funding requirement of the college. State funding and tuition and fees will also be primary sources of funding.

The projected budget submitted to the state Board of Education anticipated that a permanent facility would be established in the seventh year of the community college. The RACP funding was not included in those projections, meaning that it’s likely that a permanent home could be established much earlier than originally planned.

The college’s nine-member board recently established a committee to explore possible locations for the college. Though the funding can be used to buy property and build a new structure or renovate an existing one, it also can be used to purchase equipment that would be used by students.

“This is fantastic news for the people of Erie County,” Erie County Councilman Carl Anderson said. “Gov. Wolf really came through with his unwavering support for community college education and workforce development. And this puts Erie County’s Community College on a fast-tracked trajectory to get off the ground to a successful start. This will change the lives of young people in our community for generations to come.”

The Erie County Community College wasn’t the only project to receive the Redevelopment Capital Assistance grant funding Wednesday. Also included in the first round of funding were the following projects:

h Erie Events, UPMC Park clubhouse upgrades, $1.5 million.

The Erie Seawolves team clubhouse will be renovated and expanded to meet Major League Baseball standards. The clubhouse is located inside Erie Insurance Arena, which is attached to UPMC Park.

h Erie Events, UPMC Park, Phase III renovation, $3 million.

This funding is part of $12 million originally awarded in 2018. The state provided $3 million for four years for the project. The project includes significant renovations to nearly all areas of the park.

h Erie Events, Bayfront Place Market House Expansion II, $1 million.

Erie Events plans to construct a 22,000 square-foot market house and surface parking area along the west bayfront. The indoor market would operate year-round and feature a full-service grocery store as well as local vendors. Erie Events had requested $3.5 million for the project.

h Berry Global Group, warehouse and distribution facility, $2 million.

The city of Erie-based company plans to build a 90,000 square-foot steel and masonry warehouse and distribution facility in the 1500 block of Myrtle Street.

h Erie Center for Arts & Technology, Wayne campus improvement project, $500,000.

The project will provide fully finished office and lab space to the newly created UPMC Jameson School of Nursing at UPMC Hamot on the second and third floors of the former Wayne Elementary School, 650 East Ave. ECAT, which purchased the building in 2019, began to renovate the building in August. ECAT had requested $751,675.

h Erie Zoo otter exhibit, $500,000.

According to the Erie Zoological Society’s request, the project will create a new state-of-the-art home for the zoo’s North American river otters, as well as new off-exhibit housing for the animals. There will be a large outdoor viewing area with a water feature. The zoo had asked for $1.5 million.

h Erie-Western Pennsylvania Port Authority, Liberty Park expansion project, $2.5 million.

Liberty Park will be expanded to the area now occupied by boat storage by developing it with commercial venues, a grand entrance, an esplanade, a new playground, splash pad and picnic shelters. The project will include the installation of sanitary sewer, potable water, natural gas and electric utilities to the entire 12-acre site. The Port Authority had requested more than $4 million.

h Mercyhurst University, athletic and academic facilities renovation project, $2 million.

Mercyhurst University plans to significantly renovate the athletic center that is home to four indoor varsity sports. Playing surfaces, lighting, support spaces, and spectator viewing areas will be improved, as well as three classrooms used by the athletic training and sports medicine programs.

h City of Corry, regional firehouse project, $500,000.

The former Corry Public Works facility will be renovated for a new fire station. Work includes building out living quarters for firefighters. The city of Corry had requested $1.25 million.

Contact Matthew Rink at mrink@timesnews.com. Follow him on Twitter at @ETNrink.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

When Governments Confiscate Wealth to Fund Government Programs | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on December 3, 2020

In each case the citizens pay twice—once as taxpayers who indirectly pay the subsidy, and then again as consumers in higher prices for the goods they buy and in reduced consumption.

https://mises.org/wire/when-governments-confiscate-wealth-fund-government-programs

Ludwig von Mises

The entrepreneurs try to undertake only such projects as appear to promise profits. This means that they endeavor to use the scarce means of production in such a way that the most urgent needs will be satisfied first, and that no part of capital and labor will be devoted to the satisfaction of less urgent needs as long as a more urgent need, for whose satisfaction they could be used, goes unsatisfied.

When the government intervenes to make possible a project which promises, not profits, but losses, then there is only talk in public of the need which finds satisfaction through this intervention; we do not hear anything of the needs which fail to be satisfied because the government has diverted to other purposes the means of satisfying them. Only what is gained by the government action is considered, not also what it costs.

The economist is not called upon to tell the people what they should do and how they should use their resources. But it is his duty to call public attention to the costs. This differentiates him from the quack who always speaks only of what the intervention gives, never of what it takes.

Let us, for instance, consider a case which we may judge with objectivity today because it is a matter of the past, though not of a very distant past. It is proposed that a railroad, the construction and operation of which does not promise profitability, is to be made possible by a government subsidy. It may be, it is said, that the railroad is not profitable in the usual sense of the word and that, therefore, it is not attractive to entrepreneurs and capitalists, but it would contribute to the development of the whole region. It would promote trade, commerce, and agriculture and thus it would make an important contribution to the progress of the economy. All this would have to be taken into consideration if the value of this construction and operation is to be judged from a higher standpoint than that of profitability alone. From the standpoint of private interests the construction of the railroad may appear inadvisable. But from the standpoint of the national welfare it seems beneficial.

This reasoning is thoroughly mistaken. Of course, it cannot be denied that the inhabitants of the region through which the railroad is to run would be benefited. Or, more accurately, it gives advantages to the landowners of this region and to those who have made investments there which cannot be transferred elsewhere without a diminution of their value. It is said that it develops the productive forces of the regions through which it runs. The economist has to express this differently: The state pays the subsidies out of the taxpayers’ money for the construction, maintenance, and operation of the line which, without this assistance, could not be built and operated. These subsidies shift a part of the production from locations which offer more favorable natural conditions of production to locations which are less suited for this purpose. Land will be cultivated which, in view of its distance from the centers of consumption and in view of its low fertility, could not permit profitable cultivation unless it is subsidized indirectly by financial grants to the transport system, to the cost of which it cannot contribute proportionately. Certainly, these subsidies contribute to the economic development of a region where otherwise less would be produced. But the production increase in the part of the country thus favored by the government’s railroad policy is to be contrasted with the burden placed on production and consumption in those parts of the country which have to pay the costs of the government policy. The poorer, less fertile, and more remote land is being subsidized out of the proceeds of taxes, which either burden the production of better land or have to be borne by the consumers directly. The enterprises which are located in the less advantageous region will be able to expand production, but the enterprises in more advantageous locations will have to restrict their production. One may consider this as “just” or politically expedient, but one should not be deluded into believing that it increases the total satisfaction; it reduces it.

One should not consider the increase of production in the region served by the subsidized railroad an “advantage from the standpoint of national welfare.” These advantages amount only to this, that a number of enterprises are operating in locations which under different conditions would have been regarded as unfavorable. The privileges which the state grants to these enterprises indirectly by subsidizing the railroads are in no way different from those privileges which the state grants to other less efficient enterprises under different conditions. In the final analysis, the effect is the same whether the state subsidizes or grants privileges to a cobbler’s business, for instance, in order to enable him to compete with the shoe manufacturers, or whether it favors land, which due to its location is not competitive, by paying out of public funds part of the costs of transporting its products.

It does not matter whether the state undertakes the unprofitable enterprise itself, or whether it subsidizes a private business so that it may undertake the unprofitable enterprise. The effect on the community is identical in both instances. The method used in granting the subsidy is not important either. It does not matter whether the less efficient producer is subsidized so that he may produce or increase his production, or whether the more efficient producer is subsidized so that he will not produce, or will restrict his production. It is immaterial whether bounties are paid for producing or for not producing, or whether the government buys up the products to withhold them from the market. In each case the citizens pay twice—once as taxpayers who indirectly pay the subsidy, and then again as consumers in higher prices for the goods they buy and in reduced consumption.

A selection from chapter IV of Interventionism: An Economic Analysis. Author:

Ludwig von Mises

Ludwig von Mises was the acknowledged leader of the Austrian school of economic thought, a prodigious originator in economic theory, and a prolific author. Mises’s writings and lectures encompassed economic theory, history, epistemology, government, and political philosophy. His contributions to economic theory include important clarifications on the quantity theory of money, the theory of the trade cycle, the integration of monetary theory with economic theory in general, and a demonstration that socialism must fail because it cannot solve the problem of economic calculation. Mises was the first scholar to recognize that economics is part of a larger science in human action, a science that he called praxeology.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

High-Income Taxpayers Now Confronted At Home By IRS Agents | Zero Hedge

Posted by M. C. on February 26, 2020

And here’s the most bizarre move the IRS made before they launched a massive campaign across the country to confront rich and poor non-compliant taxpayers. The agency bought 5,000 guns, some automatic weapons, and 5 million rounds of ammunition.

It’s that time of year again. The time the IRS stocks up on tax compliance equipment.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/high-income-taxpayers-now-confronted-home-irs-agents

Profile picture for user Tyler Durden

The IRS announced Wednesday that it would increase at-home visitations to high-income taxpayers who haven’t filed tax returns on time.

Remember when the IRS under the Obama administration targeted conservative groups? Now it appears this anti-wealth attitude extends to anyone earning over $100,000 that hasn’t filed a return since 2018 or prior years.

During an at-home visit, IRS agents will inform the non-compliant taxpayer how to file returns and show them a pathway of regaining compliant status.

Uncle Sam wants his goddamn money! 

“The IRS is committed to fairness in the tax system, and we want to remind people across all income categories that they need to file their taxes,” said Paul Mamo, Director of Collection Operations, Small Business/Self Employed Division. “These visits focusing on high-income taxpayers will be taking place across the country.”

Visitations have already started this month and will continue through March for severe cases of high-income taxpayers not filing.

In the last year, the agency started aggressively targeting low-income families who neglected to pay their taxes. These struggling folks in the “greatest economy ever” are barely surviving on depressed wages, insurmountable debts, and soaring housing and healthcare inflation, have no money left over to pay taxes.

If you’re rich or poor and haven’t paid your taxes in the last several years, watch out because Big Brother is now dispatching its agents to hunt you down.

And in case an agent confronts a non-compliant taxpayer – they will offer several options if the tax bill cannot be paid in full, such as a payment plan. But if a non-compliant taxpayer declines to pay, the IRS will inform the individual that they will pursue them in court.

Land of the free? Not when it comes to debt…

And here’s the most bizarre move the IRS made before they launched a massive campaign across the country to confront rich and poor non-compliant taxpayers. The agency bought 5,000 guns, some automatic weapons, and 5 million rounds of ammunition.

 

Among the agencies being supplied with night-vision equipment, body armor, hollow-point bullets, shotguns, drones, assault rifles, and LP gas cannons are the Smithsonian, U.S. Mint, Health and Human Services, IRS, FDA, Small Business Administration, Social Security Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Education Department, Energy Department, Bureau of Engraving and Printing and an assortment of public universities,” said john Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute.

The militarization of the IRS?

Seriously, why do IRS agents need AR-15 rifles?  To collect all the money that is owed, of course!

Be seeing you

DPL-Surveillance-Equipment.com: Going Postal: Why Is USPS ...

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »