There is something wrong with our tax code, there is no need for the numerous length of laws around our tax code. The people want a simpler solution, one that doesn't require many to fork over 100+ dollars to have their taxes filled out for them on a yearly, some, a quarterly basis.

This weekend I thought at length of the vicious cycle that is our police departments around the nation. This relates to our IRS system as well in the process at which these government bodies grow at an unstopable rate.  We the people pay millions of dollars to have a police force, only to have them increase quotas to raise more money by giving citations to the people, to bring in more money in order to buy better equipment in order to give more citations. Some departments dedicate so much time to traffic violations and revnue creation that the real job we tax payers pay for them to do is becoming second fiddle to ensuring additional funds via citations continue to pour into the cities budgets.

With the IRS, I do not understand why it is we pay money, to ensure that we fund such a large and expensive department to ensure we pay more money.  If the tax code was more direct and simple, we wouldn't need thousands of IRS agents, harassing thousands of citizens to make sure they pay their taxes on an increasingly complex system.

The vicious cycle of spending for lesser returns is on display in every town across America with their police departments, rarely if ever does more funding mean more safety, it typically means more efficient ways to generate more money at the expense of the People.  Is there a government institution that works better the more it is funded?

I'll leave this post with a question, since did it become our governments, both local and federal, primary concern on finding ways to extract more money from the people?

Source: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-state-tax31-2009oct31,0,2028140.story

Starting this Sunday, California will begin withholding up to an additional 10% of workers pay as a stop gap solution to their continuing budgetary shortfalls. The LA Times reports this isn't a tax increase as the tax payer will get their money back when they go to file their tax returns,  as the LA times notes this is a forced, interest free loan from the tax payer to the state.

This is vitally concerning as a case for the loss of liberty, and property rights in times of need determined by the state.  When the government needs your hard work, they just take it, when you just need to feed your family and you just take it, you go to prison for many years. 

This amounts to nothing but widespread legal confiscation of Californians hard work, left with a promise to give it back.    

What I ask is, where will this money come from once the state claims and spends it?  10% less money in the hands of the people sure doesn’t help the spur on a spending spree to save the economy.  Looming on the horizon is the ever pivotal holiday season, with rumors of an improving economy; this couldn’t have come at a worst time.

Good luck to those barely making it, your state just made it 10% harder on you.

Since reading further into the liberty movement, the one lesson I have learned to truly appreciate time and time again is that centralizing power, offers one easy target for special interests.  One strong reason lobbyists push to make as many decisions as possible settled on the federal level is one target to bribe, and push in their favor.  I whole heartily believe this is the primary reason for the erosion of state rights over the past 50+ years.

When we as a nation take the decision making powers away from the states, and centralize them in Washington, we make it easier for special interests to focus their funds, and maximize their ROI on donations.  When the issue is decided at the state level, imagine the logistics of trying to convince local legislators in all the states to rule in the favor that benefits the lobbyists clients the most.  In today's corporate America, it's far too costly and risky to spend the money on states, when you can simply spend it on one group, that has the power to force everyone in the nation a certain direction. 

For me, this is what Healthcare reform will ultimately accomplish: one fat, bloated, tax wasting target in DC to corrupt and bend to their ways, and trust me, it will become corrupt. 

Although Healthcare is not currently handled on a state level in the local state governments, the same idea can be applied to the numerous private insurance companies out there offering an insurance product.  While we remove the ability for the corporate insurance giants from playing dirty, we are opening up our well being, and general healthcare to the lobbyists in DC. Centralizing our care and the decisions made on our health direction to lobbyists with armed with millions of dollars ready to ensure their clients get the bulk of the tax money, and your care, an afterthought. 

Now I am no fan of the insurance industry, and they have brought this upon themselves.  Refusing to insure some people and the pre-existing condition issue has created this problem for them.  Everyone has a family member that has been treated unfairly by the insurance company; this is what has caused the outrage for healthcare reform.

We do need reform, but we must resist the urge push legislation that will add to the size of government, and reduce our freedoms via higher taxes, less choice, and more centralized power in DC.

Found this article on WIRED.com...

"As an ex-Brit, I’m well aware of the authorities’ love of surveillance and snooping, but even I, a pessimistic cynic, am amazed by the governments latest plan: to install Orwell’s telescreens in 20,000 homes."

£400 million ($668 million) will be spend on installing and monitoring CCTV cameras in the homes of private citizens. Why? To make sure the kids are doing their homework, going to bed early and eating their vegetables. The scheme has, astonishingly, already been running in 2,000 family homes. The government’s “children’s secretary” Ed Balls is behind the plan, which is aimed at problem, antisocial families. The idea is that, if a child has a more stable home life, he or she will be less likely to stray into crime and drugs."

I do understand that citizens in the UK are not born with the rights as we are in America, and our liberty is far more secure than theirs is.  This is distrurbing becuase we are all lead to believe that our greatest ally is alot like us, when in fact this just goes to show how off base our greatest ally is. 

The rationale of government survaliance in order to produce better children, is beyond my understanding as a liberty loving American.

Source: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/britain-to-put-cctv-cameras-inside-private-homes/