Letter: Taxes and representation
Since the days of the Boston Tea Party, Americans (colonists in those days) have despised, indeed most seem disposed to hate taxes. While pondering this historical event and its possible effect on current dispositions, it is important to recall the protest was sending money across the Atlantic without representation in the imposition. Of course, the rejoinder to this observation would be, we don't like or accept the result even though imposed by our elected representatives.
After these many years we should by now recognize a new measure -- that being, we are buying things we need. Yes, it is quite possible our representatives are buying things their citizens need, at least someone thinks so.
How often have you heard that government should behave like a family handling their own budget? I believe that is exactly how government behaves. Yes, government does buy things we don't need, and of course that behavior on the part of many, if not most of us, is what is for the most part responsible for today's slump in the economy.
Now to the point of this diatribe. To those who have been concerned that government expenditure creates no economic benefit, I would ask them to explain how that purchase of goods and services produces a different end result, depending on who does the purchasing. To rail against taxes has not produced a satisfactory result. It is time to place our emphasis on what will produce a better result.
Back to representative government: Maybe we should recognize that we hire them and let them do their job without lobbying that often manifests itself in threats. Of course, that will never happen. How about representatives who don't seek to entertain us, i.e. build stadiums or subsidize our spending that exceeds our needs for whatever turns your crank?
Alec G. Olson