Don't Judge the Player by the Team

I don't know the reasons behind the current strike by National Football Referees, but it sure has raised eyebrows and blood pressures. Officiating sporting events, professional or amateur, has never been an easy thing. Nor has it ever been without controversy.

I suspect that the majority of those who officiate professional sporting events receive hate mail, possibly even death threats. Players who commit errors that lead to their team's defeat do.

Fans gather after a game to scrutinize every play, every decision on and off the field, and every call made by every official. Heated arguments erupt between fan bases of opposing teams. Rivalries sometimes boil over into violence. Sports fans can be very devoted, spending a great deal of their time examining the statistics of an individual player and his or her importance to the game.

So why don't we see the same devotion and passion among people when it comes to choosing their political representatives?

I'm an Orioles fan. I like to know if Adam Jones can hit sliders down and away. I want to know how Matt Wietters bats against left handers.

Politically, I want to know if my congressman will support my views. I want to know my representative's stand on the issues. And, just as I will demonstrate my support for a good ballplayer and my lack of support for a poor one, I will support those who prove to me that they will represent my views in congress.

To do that, I need to understand the issues. I need to see how a given politician reacts to these issues. How else can I make an educated vote? I read the opinions of sports analysts from different organizations to better understand a play or player. I need to do the same with issues and politicians  before I vote.

Sadly, a great many people I know don't see past the party affiliations of the candidates. It's like rooting for a player on your home team regardless of his lack of hustle, his lackluster play on the field, or his inability to follow the manager's orders.

I appreciate ballplayers on many teams. I want my home team to win, but that doesn't stop me from acknowledging the fine play of a player on another team.

If we followed the issues and the politicians as strongly as we follow our sports heroes, we might not be in the fix we're in right now.

For Richer, For Poorer - Tax Equality?

Here are a few hypotheticals for you.

1. You're rich. It's tax time, and you can reduce your tax bill by simply following the opportunities written into the tax code. You don't have to break the law, just follow it.
2. You're middle class. It's tax time, and you can reduce your tax bill by simply following the opportunities written into the tax code. You don't have to break the law, just follow it.
3. You're barely getting by, living week to week, getting by on a minimum wage salary, subsidized housing and food stamps. It's tax time, and by just filling out the tax form properly you need not pay any taxes whatsoever.

What do you do? Is there any difference in your actions if you are rich, middle class, or in abject poverty?

Does being poor give you a righteous entitlement to take advantage of the law and thus pay no taxes?
What about being rich, or middle class?

Here are two more.

1. You own or run a multi-national corporation. It's tax time, and you can reduce your corporate tax bill by simply following the opportunities written into the tax code. You don't have to break the law, just follow it.
2. You own a small business. Your business barely survives year to year. It's tax time, and you can reduce your small business tax bill by simply following the opportunities written into the tax code. You don't have to break the law, just follow it.

Is there a difference? Should there be?

In order to function, any government, like any household, like any business, needs income. That's why we have a tax system. Over the years ours has become labyrinthine, full of deductions, loopholes, escape mechanisms. About 71% of all taxes in the United States are paid by 10% of the population. Nearly half of the workforce pays no tax at all.
After all, you can reduce your tax bill by simply following the opportunities written into the tax code. You don't have to break the law, just follow it.

So whose to blame for this situation? We are.

Both political parties have had opportunities, periods when they controlled both houses of congress and the presidency, even a super-majority. And yet, here we stand. We can blame "special interests," but the truth is we have had the power all along and have not acted. Everyone believes their Senator, their Representative, their President, is the one that will act in our best interest.

And guess what? They have.

Alexis de Tocqueville noted,

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. "

Every time we vote to extend tax breaks to businesses, that is what we are doing. But also, every time we extend the welfare net we are doing the same.

What do you think?

State of Stealth

A battle is being waged in the state of Maryland over the state's desire to expand casino gambling. Huge in the rhetorical arguments of both sides is the claim that more casinos equals more money for education.
History, and the state constitution, teach us one thing. The amount of money collected through the collection of taxes on gambling will equate to a commensurate rise in the total state budget, but the necessary funds for education would have been found regardless.
Look at it this way.
Suppose the state budget included $100 million dollars for education. The state tells us that we don't have sufficient funds to give our children a quality education. Okay, you say. The state promises to allocate the taxes collected from the casinos to education, so give me more gambling statewide.
The first year's tax collection nets $50 million in casino taxes, and you see the education budget rise by $50 million. Ah, you say to yourself, the state was telling the truth. The money did go to education.
But this is a half truth.
You see, the state is obligated to provide a quality education for our children. If that meant to raise the education budget by $50 million that would have occurred whether or not the casinos were taxed. Without the casino tax, either discretionary spending would have suffered, or other taxes would have been raised to cover those discretionary items.
Let's say you live on a fixed income and the cost of food goes up. What do you do? If you have no way to increase your income, you need to pull money from somewhere else in your budget to cover that increase. Maybe you give up going out to the movies. Maybe you cancel your cable subscription. But you still eat. Cable is discretionary, eating is not,(although you can do a better job with the cash you have for food by making better choices at the grocer.)
A less that ethical individual would go to the local food bank and ask for food but not reduce their discretionary spending, thus having their cake and eating while watching the movies too.
This is precisely what the state is doing.
I'm sure spending on education will rise.
But at what cost to the citizens? The casino money came from the citizens in the first place.
Can you say "Stealth Tax?"