main menu | youngsters categories | authors | new stories | search | links | settings | author tools |
The Tax You Love to Pay (standard:Editorials, 1853 words) | |||
Author: GXD | Added: Jul 31 2007 | Views/Reads: 3427/2249 | Story vote: 0.00 (0 votes) |
Suppose you could choose precisely where each and every penny of your sales tax goes, and specify how it is to be spent. Well, now you can! | |||
Click here to read the first 75 lines of the story vote has now approved a budget sufficient for repair of the streets." And so on. The same kind of thing happens at the state level, the national level, the international level. If an issue is particularly unpopular, a predetermined statute of limitations will run out, and the funds partially collected will go to a "Pending" fund. Proponents of the issue may petition for its continuance, or (if there is real lack of interest) the item may be permanently dropped from receipt backs and the amount collected go into a general fund. How do issues get onto receipt backs, anyway? That's easier than you think. Instead of having local, state, national and international governments, anyone can pick up a simple, machine-readable form and put on it a request to include an issue. The machine-readable form goes into the collection box, right along with the receipts, and when it is read, the message is transmitted to an agenda, in a decision-making office with legal authority where a clerk-specialist determines which kind of agency should give consideration or study to the issue. If it involves fixing potholes, the petition would be sent to local, county, state or national offices, where it would be "accepted" as part of the work schedule, or "rejected" as not applying to that office. Once a petition has been accepted, an electronic file is opened for it, a clerk assigns a statute of limitations, and an estimator assigns a figure to be budgeted for the job. This file is then "registered" with the local (or state, or national) node of the electronic network, and will immediately begin to appear on the backs of receipt rolls printed at the Post Office. Now, when you purchase goods or services and get a receipt, you can indicate whether funding should go for that project. The system is both self-supporting and self-limiting. If not enough people or machines are working to get effective response to the public, more and more requests (and funding) will appear to support the system, hire clerks and decision makers, and improve service. Whenever excessive funds begin to accumulate in the "general fund", only individuals of the general public have the authority to decide where those funds are spent -- the decision is no longer left to mayors and patronage systems, governors and elected officials. Since the system is largely automatic and in the hands of buyers and sellers in an economy (every economy has buyers and sellers -- China, the Soviet Union, South Africa, Mexico, Canada) the following branches of government will no longer be needed, and eventually will disappear for lack of support: A. Country leaders, their cabinets, ministries, congresses and advisors B. Military leaders, troops and suppliers of weapons C. Revenue services, tax collection agencies, accountants and others who thrive on the recirculation of monies without contributing to increases in human value. The system suggested, with modifications as needed to function on a worldwide scale, will reduce the burden of government from most of the population in most countries, reduce the availability of funds for supporting non-productive segments of the population, and enable more effective and immediate popular support for issues which are actually desired by the residents of a district, citizens of a country, etc. It will eliminate the root of all sources of conflict, since the most disgruntled individual can create an issue and rally support for it in a matter of hours or days, and literally change the world without resorting to power struggles, hostilities, complex voting systems, etc. With the system indicated, it should be possible to "govern" a population of 100,000,000 people with -- at most -- 500,000 individuals, all at relatively low decision making levels. This would relieve people in every country of the world from their burden of "beggar's taxes" and improve the productivity of peoples everywhere by 20 to 35%. Advertise in classified as "Strategy for a Lifetime Tax-Free Income -- Details $5.00" or something like that. When inquiries come in, send this paper. The objective, of course, is to enable the tax to take place at the point where it limits the wanton consumption of natural resources. If the tax on an item is high enough, many people will cut back on its use. If the suppliers of this product object, put their case to a vote on the back of the sales slips. Don't bother the Supreme Court. In this way, direct participation of each individual in every transaction made -- without coercion -- is like getting a free lottery ticket. They canuse it or throw it away. It is no more than an opportunity for free speech and freedom of the press. The status of public opinion will thus be enabled in a consistent, uniform manner at any point, and throughout the entire country, at all times. Once a system of this sort is in action, fewer workers will be needed for Government, and more workers will become available for productivity of essential goods and services. This continuous census of public desire will outstrip -- by far -- the most exhaustive poll-taking employed by governments today. Decisions will be taken out of the hands of public representatives, because the statistical record of public demand will be continuously open to scrutiny by all and at all times. Since government workers simply cannot be let go on a whim, the reduction in size of government will be reduced little by little, by attrition, over several generations. Certain issues will, of course, not be accessible to the public -- where the elected leaders must choose a secret strategic policy, such as making war or manipulating the economy to prevent an institution from failing -- unless the populace has voted to eliminate the institution, in which case the government leaders become answerable. The particular advantage of this procedure lies in making known actual local preferences. So if a particular county wants to prohibit eating red rasberries, this need not affect an adjacent county, state, or country. The repercussions, will, of course, be volcanic. When the question turns up whether tax money should be spent in cleaning up a toxic waste dump affecting a 3-state area, this will garner sufficient attention to quickly raise the necessary funds, since it is no longer a local issue but a tri-state (or National) one. The advisory boards on each issue -- which would consist essentially of the existing government and other public agencies -- would have to carefully phrase each issue so it will not bias public response in the direction of a foregone conclusion. While fewer people will eventually be needed to monitor that sector of the economy, they will have to have broader diversification, in order to assess the impact of each issue on other sectors, before publishing on the sales slips. Here is where senators and representatives come in: not as voters, but as counselors and advisors -- essentially the committee-like activities that they presently engage in. Only the result will not be laws, but simply authorizing action and allotting funds for goods and services that its citizens actually expect good government to provide. Seattle, Jan. 1998 Gerald X. Diamond Tweet
Authors appreciate feedback! Please write to the authors to tell them what you liked or didn't like about the story! |
GXD has 68 active stories on this site. Profile for GXD, incl. all stories Email: geraldx6@hotmail.com |