by Outcast_Searcher » Tue 20 Oct 2009, 20:58:33
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('deMolay', 'D')epression flattens the tax rolls, and local government hikes fines fess and penalties to continue gorging themselves and their fat paycheques and pensions. If this is true do you agree with it, or should government be cut back like everyone else.
If true, and I have seem complaints about this kind of stuff in quite a few sources, I ABSOLUTELY think that government should live within its means. As suggested in the article, if they need more revenue, then they should take it to the taxpayers and (legally) raise rates. Of course as a libertarian, 99% of the populace think's I'm insane...
Notes:
1). I'm not crazy about the prime example they use - driving without auto insurance. If you CHOOSE to drive, then you should have liability insurance. If not, then your a** DESERVES a fine. Speed traps with OUTRAGEOUS fines for minor speeding is a much better example.
2). What is really outrageous is in almost all the articles I see about this stuff, I almost NEVER see the point that the stupid local/state governments should live within their means, instead of adding a slew of new programs when times are good, and (apparently) expect to pay them with WHINING when revenues inevitably fall. Brilliant financial planning. Of course, all the whining is that the federal government (yeah, THAT brilliant scion of financial responsibilty) should bail them out!
