Jim Hlavac
| Poliitics Home The Practicalist The Socialist Era Politics Re-Explained Fundamentals Domestic Affairs Economic Theory Foreign Affairs Libertarian Ideas Political Theory Philosophy Royalty & Theology |
Economic Theory
| Economic Theory |
Why doesn't any one point out that transferring a lot of programs back
to the states coupled with the ability to tax local people for local
services eliminates a level of bureaucracy?
Every state seems to cry out that they are paying more to
Washington then they are getting back. Every pundit seems to be
agreeing that the Federal Government needs to help the states. But
the only place the Federal government gets it's money is from the
very states it is trying to help. In order to collect the taxes to pay for
the programs in the states the federal government must take tax
dollars from a state, bring them to Washington, mix up in the general
fund and then pay back out to the states. In doing so it must deduct
20 to 30 percent, maybe more, to cover the administrative costs of
collecting the taxes from a state so it can give back the money to the
state.
Why not let the state collect the taxes locally, to be applied to
the programs it develops? That just leaves more money at home and
lessen the cost overhead, not by the total amount that the federal
government pays out to cover its costs -- but some larger percentage,
because the states might have to hire more people to do the work
that some federal workers do now.
Congress should be able to set broad national policies, almost
vague, within parameters, and then let individual states develop the
programs within the states, and paid for with state collected tax
dollars.
to the states coupled with the ability to tax local people for local
services eliminates a level of bureaucracy?
Every state seems to cry out that they are paying more to
Washington then they are getting back. Every pundit seems to be
agreeing that the Federal Government needs to help the states. But
the only place the Federal government gets it's money is from the
very states it is trying to help. In order to collect the taxes to pay for
the programs in the states the federal government must take tax
dollars from a state, bring them to Washington, mix up in the general
fund and then pay back out to the states. In doing so it must deduct
20 to 30 percent, maybe more, to cover the administrative costs of
collecting the taxes from a state so it can give back the money to the
state.
Why not let the state collect the taxes locally, to be applied to
the programs it develops? That just leaves more money at home and
lessen the cost overhead, not by the total amount that the federal
government pays out to cover its costs -- but some larger percentage,
because the states might have to hire more people to do the work
that some federal workers do now.
Congress should be able to set broad national policies, almost
vague, within parameters, and then let individual states develop the
programs within the states, and paid for with state collected tax
dollars.