Can There Be A Vision For Nevada Where We Actually See Less?
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
As Geoffrey Lawrence of the Nevada Policy Research Institute correctly assesses, the soon to be assembled “Nevada Stakeholders” group will be put to work in order to come up with a “Vision” for Nevada’s future and excuses for why state lawmakers need to find and implement new tax schemes. The questions are whether the stakeholders can come up with a vision for the state’s future which allows for citizens to receive their money’s worth for the taxes they pay and at the time offers maximum individual opportunity?
Lawrence is absolutely correct in his belief that Nevada citizens should have more say over how they spend their money than government know-it-alls who want us to vote for them because they will do so much for our own good. Can that be the vision that we seek to initiate for our state?
His concerns over tax-eating special interests participating in the visioning process as a way of worming their way deeper into the pocketbooks of taxpayers are very much on track as being legitimate worries that all Nevadans should be troubled by. Can a vision for the state’s future be crafted which somehow puts state and local government out of the business of picking winners and losers, allowing private enterprise and capitalism to prosper?
Geoffrey nails the contention that quality of life goes far beyond measurements using yardsticks of government expenditures. Can there be a vision for Nevada created, established and maintained where individual responsibility and freedoms matter more than how much a government bureaucrat handed out in “assistance”?
I once heard a speaker describe that our ability to see the way things are is controlled by our mindset. “When all you have is a hammer – everything takes on the appearance of being nails.” Those involved in developing Nevada’s vision for the next 5, 10 and 20 years, need to work hard in considering that Nevada’s private sector people matter more than state government. That doesn’t seem to be something that the Nevada Legislature took into account in the 2009 Session, but it needs to be a foundation for any concept that we should aspire to become.
Our founding Fathers had a vision for what they thought our nation should strive to be. Although it wasn’t about taking the course of big government that we’re heading to now, they provided a framework and principles – built on ideas – that somehow have to be included in the vision our legislators get back from those they select to create Nevada’s vision report.
As Geoffrey Lawrence of the Nevada Policy Research Institute correctly assesses, the soon to be assembled “Nevada Stakeholders” group will be put to work in order to come up with a “Vision” for Nevada’s future and excuses for why state lawmakers need to find and implement new tax schemes. The questions are whether the stakeholders can come up with a vision for the state’s future which allows for citizens to receive their money’s worth for the taxes they pay and at the time offers maximum individual opportunity?
Lawrence is absolutely correct in his belief that Nevada citizens should have more say over how they spend their money than government know-it-alls who want us to vote for them because they will do so much for our own good. Can that be the vision that we seek to initiate for our state?
His concerns over tax-eating special interests participating in the visioning process as a way of worming their way deeper into the pocketbooks of taxpayers are very much on track as being legitimate worries that all Nevadans should be troubled by. Can a vision for the state’s future be crafted which somehow puts state and local government out of the business of picking winners and losers, allowing private enterprise and capitalism to prosper?
Geoffrey nails the contention that quality of life goes far beyond measurements using yardsticks of government expenditures. Can there be a vision for Nevada created, established and maintained where individual responsibility and freedoms matter more than how much a government bureaucrat handed out in “assistance”?
I once heard a speaker describe that our ability to see the way things are is controlled by our mindset. “When all you have is a hammer – everything takes on the appearance of being nails.” Those involved in developing Nevada’s vision for the next 5, 10 and 20 years, need to work hard in considering that Nevada’s private sector people matter more than state government. That doesn’t seem to be something that the Nevada Legislature took into account in the 2009 Session, but it needs to be a foundation for any concept that we should aspire to become.
Our founding Fathers had a vision for what they thought our nation should strive to be. Although it wasn’t about taking the course of big government that we’re heading to now, they provided a framework and principles – built on ideas – that somehow have to be included in the vision our legislators get back from those they select to create Nevada’s vision report.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 11/3/2009 10:19 AM 
Categories: Nevada
Tags: Interim Finance Committee Nevada Tax Study SCR 37
Categories: Nevada
Tags: Interim Finance Committee Nevada Tax Study SCR 37
Sure. Let's start getting rid of Farm Subsidies. We don't need to prop up THAT industry with OUR tax dollars!
Also get rid of that cheap government subsidized water and water delivery systems for farmers! Especially for farmers that try to GROW FOOD in the DRIEST FREAKING STATE IN THE USA, Nevada!
Yeah let's shut down those freeloading farmer-types who take OUR bailout money and stick it straight into their after harvest bonus checks! At the very least, make them pay FREE MARKET PRICES for water, fertilizer and pesticides.
ps. Why is the Farm Bureau blog writing about Healthcare? Shouln't you be out plowing a field or feeding the pigs, instead of sounding like RuralFoxNews?
Reply to this
Zeke, although you pose your radical-libertarian alternatives merely rhetorically, they would indeed be better. Your use of them, however, is ultimately ad hominem -- and is applicable to virtually everyone in society.
Reply to this