“People know how to spend their money better than the
government does.” Really?
That is what Congresswoman Liz Cheney said the day before
her campaign brochure arrived in every mailbox in Wyoming. The multi-color, tri-fold,
obviously very expensive and self-aggrandizing document was titled “Working for
Wyoming.” It also included a note telling us that we paid for it.
“This mailing,” it said on the front cover, “was prepared,
published, and mailed at taxpayer expense.”
We all know how to spend our money better than that.
Though Cheney wastes our money on campaign brochures, it is
more than a little silly for a Member of Congress to say, “People know how to
spend their money better than the government does.” That is a pitifully pandering
slogan that can’t survive a moment’s reflection.
It’s one of those phrases politicians store away in their
rhetorical arsenals. My grandmother embroidered similarly trite sayings on
doilies. It’s specifically designed to barely touch little more than the tiniest
nerve endings on the surface of a voter’s brain. Allowed to penetrate any
deeper, the voter realizes he or she has been had.
Followed to its logical extreme, we should simply not tax
anyone anything. If people know how to spend their money better than the government,
what purpose does the government serve? Let the folks who know better keep it
all.
But we should amend the Preamble of the Constitution to
reflect the reality created by Cheney’s sloganeering.
“We the people of the United States of America, in order to
form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,
provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the
blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and agree that
it’s everyone for themselves.”
Think of the possibilities. If some folks want to save for
their medical needs, that’s how they will spend their money, “as opposed to
those who are just,” as Senator Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) said, “spending every
darn penny they have on booze or women or movies.”
When their parents are old and sick or their children become
disabled, they can spend all they have caring for them, though it won’t be
enough.
Some might buy tanks and missiles to defend themselves and
their neighbors. Not many will find it as wise to provide mental health and
substance abuse care for people they don’t know. A few hunters and hikers might
spend some money on maintaining a picnic table at a national park. I’m unsure
whether anyone would pay to inspect restaurants or oversee worker safety or
plow roads. Libraries and other cultural resources don’t matter to many voters.
They might not choose to spend their money on them.
Among those Cheney says “know how to spend their money
better than the government,” not many have spent wisely saving for old age. Only
a handful will spend on education. Imagine how few would invest a nickel in
local, state, or national infrastructure.
Even without an obligation to pay for the necessities of
life now covered by taxation, those folks have already spent themselves into
nearly as bad a financial shape as the government.
Private debt may soon equal public debt. Those folks Cheney
was talking have been about as successful as the government in amassing debt.
They have nearly 12 trillion dollars in personal debt. Most saved nothing for
their senior years. A third owe more on credit cards than they have in savings.
Half have fewer dollars available for emergencies than they owe.
Actually, Liz Cheney’s vote for the recent tax cuts is a
step farther in that direction than she’ll admit. She won’t even acknowledge
knowing how much her undeservedly wealthy family will benefit from the cuts.
What she and her GOP colleagues were really saying is, “We
know how to spend your money better than you do and we have decided to spend it
on tax cuts for ourselves and our wealthy donors. It’s good being us. It sucks
to be you.”
No comments:
Post a Comment