Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« September 2005 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
You are not logged in. Log in
South Dakota Libertarian Party Blog
September 26, 2005

Now Playing: Tales From The Outback by Bryan Lutter
“I’d be a lot better off if every pheasant in the country croaked!”

Now why is that such a common statement amongst so many farmers? I’ll explain at the end of this op/ed why ring-neck loathing became South Dakota’s other popular fall sport.

First, let me go off on a tangent, I promise to bring it all together at the end.

Is property tax the best way to fund schools?

The answer lies in the ancient meaning behind the word “tax”, which derives from an older word, “exaction”. Look it up and you’ll see what I’m talking about.

The point is that if monies paid to government by an individual were “free will” we’d call them donations. The difference between a tax and a donation is same as the difference between rape and making love.

The solution to this problem? I’m not making this up, I’m borrowing it from six-thousand year-old Greek people. Liturgy, even 5,000 years after the Greeks invented it, remains the smartest way to pay for public projects. Donations and scholarships citing the name of the giver are examples of what the ancient Greeks called liturgy.

Here’s how it works in real life: Hillary and I spend less than $200 anonymously in total property tax. If and only if, a scholarship program were to replace a decent portion of property taxes for local K-12 school students, Hill and I would likely chip in much more than that between the two School Districts in Sanborn County. Why, because newspaper profits depend on both schools equally. People who get the most good out of a school are morally obligated to pay for it, not necessarily a landlord.

When a student receives a scholarship, they receive with it a vested interest to make something of themselves not from the public in general, but from specific individuals providing the scholarship. History shows the latter achieves better results.

History also proves that the same people who scream about taxes become the first to donate the most in a liturgy system. It isn’t the question of the loss of money that’s at issue; it’s the principle of a system which allows voters to help themselves to it which gets folks fired up.

Liturgies also solve the issue of when to close or build a school. If individual donors want to provide adequate funds out of their own pocket to build a school for a dozen students or even just one student, then so be it. Taxes destroy the spirit of liturgy, and I can site dozens of examples were liturgies bring in four times the money if they replace taxes.

Now, where was I going by talking about all the farmers who get forced into excessive land costs due to the pheasant industry? This same problem arises whenever agriculture is forced to compete against any commercial or residential interests for land. That is why zoning Ag land at a lower rate than supermarket land makes sense to a lot of people.

There is nothing agricultural whatsoever about planting trees down the middle of what once was a perfectly productive wheat field. There is nothing agricultural whatsoever about CRP. These examples are NOT a gray area! Point blank, trees and CRP deter, not enhance raising food, so how can they get zoned agricultural? It’s bad enough when local people get away without paying commercial property tax rates when destroying land that could raise food. It’s even worse when fat cats from out-of-state pull off this shenanigan.

How is it possible that a pheasant hunter from Chicago can buy productive farmland in SD, utterly destroy it by planting it to trees and CRP, bring in his corporate buddies to enjoy it, and still pay agricultural tax rates?

If these guys don’t pay commercial property tax rates, then why do the folks on Main Street? Maybe everyone should pay Ag rates including homeowners?

How is it possible we can charge out-of-state hunters more for licenses, but we can’t whack them more for taxes on land? If SD law doesn’t allow citizenship to differentiate on tax rates, then perhaps the Game, Fish, and Pricks should charge everyone the same for licenses. What’s the difference?

Is replacing property taxes with scholarships a great idea? Yes.

Will it happen? Maybe in another 5,000 years at soonest.

How long will we continue granting low Ag property tax rates to politically-connected commercial interests? Forever.

Send hate mail to bryanl@santel.net


Posted by sd2/libertarian at 10:29 AM CDT
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post

View Latest Entries