OP-ED | Taxes Build Our State and Nation
by Wade Gibson | Apr 16, 2012 9:55am
(7) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Opinion
For Easter, my friend and I traveled from Connecticut to visit family in Texas, a distance of nearly 2,000 miles. Two centuries ago, our journey would have taken months by land; a sailboat would have hastened our trip, although we would have feared pirates along the way.
In 2012, we sped down the Merritt Parkway, hopped a plane to Detroit, grabbed a burger at Fuddruckers, and caught another flight to San Antonio. The whole journey took about half a day. Sure, our airline seats were cramped and the Merritt was congested, but neither of us caught dysentery, fell off a horse, or perished at sea.
Public investments made it all possible, and gave us the luxury of worrying whether TSA would find the yogurt stashed in our carry-on’s, instead of whether we would find our trail blocked by bandits. Government built the Merritt Parkway and airports in New York, Michigan, and Texas; it kept our roadways and airways safe; and it pioneered the jet engines and air traffic control that made everything possible.
I mention this now because April 17 is Tax Day, when our income taxes come due. Many vilify this day, treating any dollar we pay in taxes as wasted. What gets ignored in this talk is why we pay taxes. We pay taxes for the things we can’t accomplish on our own — transportation; education; public safety; protection from illness; and defense from enemies, foreign and domestic.
Another fact often ignored is how, in Connecticut, while we all benefit from public goods and services, some among us work far less to maintain them. State and local taxes account for a far larger percentage of some people’s earnings than others’. Surprising though it may seem, the poorest 20 percent in Connecticut pay twice as much of their incomes as the richest 1 percent.
The effective state and local tax rate for the poorest fifth is 11.2 percent, more than twice the 5.5 percent paid by the wealthiest 1 percent, according to an analysis by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. People in the bottom 20 percent earn $12,700 a year on average, hundreds of times less than those in the top 1 percent who pull in $3.2 million on average. While some may argue everyone should chip in the same percent of their income, few would argue the wealthy should contribute less.
Either way, I think we all are glad previous generations paid their taxes to build modern transportation, secure our families, and educate our grandparents, parents, and ourselves. Paying taxes, voting on Election Day, serving in the armed forces when called upon — these are some of the responsibilities we owe as citizens to each other and future generations. Taxes are an annual payment for the freedom and security we now enjoy, and our children count on us to sustain them.
Wade Gibson is a senior policy fellow at Connecticut Voices for Children, where he focuses on state tax, budget, and economic policy.
Tags: Taxes, state, federal, highways, infrastructure, civic duty, connecticut, dh
(7) Comments
posted by: joemanc | April 16, 2012 11:52am
Wade - Can you tell me why the folks in New Hampshire pay no sales tax, no income tax and no alcohol taxes, as well as a lot less on gasoline taxes and that state seems to be doing just fine?
I also tax issue with this statement:
“Many vilify this day, treating any dollar we pay in taxes as wasted.”
No, we believe in limited government, as our founding fathers intended. Those of us who work hard and pay taxes would like some money to keep for ourselves, to save for a rainy day, for retirement, and for a vacation when possible.
posted by: Scott2014 | April 16, 2012 12:04pm
Most people understand the importance of taxes. They are ok with spending money on those itmes you mentioned. What we don’t like is taking money from one person and giving it to another. There is way too much money spent on entitlements, Welfare, and waste. Having a fairer flatter tax system to fund the government would be better.
posted by: Matt W. | April 16, 2012 3:43pm
Since 1990, the budget is up well over 250 percent. Perhaps someone should stand up for the poor and demand that the government stop spending so much. Given your premise that they are carrying most of the load it seems the Dems in the Assebly should be more sensitive to the fact that these people can’t afford it. Link
BTW - Your statistics are hilarous! Thank you.
posted by: Lawrence | April 16, 2012 10:36pm
joemanc,
Good points, but I might add that NH has the third-highest property tax rate in the country, 2nd highest corporate tax rate per capita, 11th highest corporate tax rate overall, and 15th highest cigarette tax in the country.
NH also has a gravel tax, timber tax, state education property tax, utility property tax, electricity consumption tax, and a 9 percent meals and hotel rental tax.
All thse figures are from The Tax Foundation.
posted by: fgibson | April 17, 2012 10:40am
Matt W., Good points, but the 250 percent figure you cite doesn’t adjust for inflation. By that logic, Toyota Corolla’s have also risen massively in cost. State spending in CT has not risen as a share of the economy in over 20 years - those are official statistics from the State Comptroller.
posted by: Matt W. | April 17, 2012 1:19pm
fgibson: Thanks. Toyota Carollas have increased in price by about 75% along with all the other goods in the US market place between 1990 and 2012. To what does the Comptroller attribute the increase in spending over inflation? 250% is a far cry from 75%.
posted by: ... | April 17, 2012 4:11pm
Well Matt, probably a fair amount of that is new spending, yes. But when you consider the basic expenditures for every governmental depts. and agencies, you’ve got a lot of products that have increase from inflation lumped together under one budget.
Therefore, general spending would inflate much more than a singular product over 20 years. It’d perhaps be better to compare the average spending of a household on an annual basis (which includes long-term loans/debts, as well as spending based on earned income).
But I’ll shoot you a solid Matt and wonder if the 250% increase you calculated out in state spending includes bonding spending (which is another form of state spending). If not…well another zero wouldn’t hurt :p!