Jon Ralston makes a strong case against higher taxes

Victor Joecks

Given some of the other stuff Ralston’s written, I don’t think it’s intentional. But has there ever been a better reason to keep more money in the hands of the citizens and not in those of the politicians?

I want to believe that despite the collection of irredeemable nincompoops, borderline criminals and self-interested cowards, some legislators actually want to be thoughtful and responsible in dealing with the state’s budget problems. I want to be believe that some of the term-limited folks don’t see the end as simply a new beginning to search for other elective jobs. I want to believe that there are leaders in the capital who see beyond the numbers games, the right- and left-wing shibboleths and the external forces and won’t set the bar as low as simply performing better than The Man Formerly Known as Governor.

I want to believe, but then I open my eyes. And there it is – the legislative “process” that somehow allows inane measures to escape such as that silliness about disposing of the Electoral College or one assemblyman’s bill (and I am sure there are more) that will directly benefit a company that employs him.

I think there are plenty of other good reasons to support limited, accountable and prioritized spending, including this one from Milton Friedman.

There is a sure-fire way to predict the consequences of a government social program adopted to achieve worthy ends. Find out what the well-meaning, public-interested persons who advocated its adoption expected it to accomplish. Then reverse those expectations. You will have an accurate prediction of actual results.

But for anyone who isn’t convinced by that, consider Ralston’s words. Why would you allow the people Ralston described to take more of your money?

Bonus reading: Details about Assemblyman Mark Manendo’s bill that would shut down a competing body shop that’s about to open a location a half mile from Manendo’s shop.