Building On The Argument For Changing Nevada’s Tax System
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
In the post, “Taking A Different Approach To Nevada’s Tax System” I attempted to offer a replacement state revenue collection system to the present methods used. In that approach I suggested that every Nevada citizen above the age of 18 would pay a flat amount of taxes (I used the figure $8,000, per year, but that is simply a number suggested and not a fixed amount that is based on any rationale). I also maintain that whatever the amount to be levied would be paid in quarterly installments by each taxpayer. This is intended to make the act of paying the tax as memorable as possible – not something hidden in every purchase or imposed as a percentage on the payrolls paid by employers.
After watching the stream of tax spenders come to the witness table of the Nevada Legislature’s Interim Finance Committee to make their case for why they shouldn’t be required to go without any funding that they currently receive (never mind the $900 Million hole of spending exceeding tax revenue)…it became crystal clear that not enough Nevadans are paying taxes to recognize the level of responsibility required to finance the spending desired (and thought to be a requirement). With the current system, too many people rely on other people’s money and are convinced that they are entitled to be spending it. This is further reinforced by political leaders who see government as the ends to filling all societal needs and who are elected to their positions of authority/power on the basis that they will be there for the tax spenders, delivering the goods through the extractions of those who can be nailed as the targets for making the payments.
From the hole in the budget, caused by spending more than tax revenues yielded, the message should be obvious that instead of taxing to the need for spending – an opposite and more responsible approach would be to determine an agreed upon amount of tax revenue…distribute the burden equally on all Nevada citizens…and then spend on an agreed upon priority basis, with that limitation being the known amount of money to spend. Those who seek or need services not within the scope of the priorities for spending will be able to work out alternative solutions to find how to get what government can no longer afford to carry out. The private sector would have signals of need where they would be able to fashion business models that might fit a new venture in providing a service or product that now is not part of the mix for government to do.
Without a change in the organizational direction of Nevada’s financial approach, there will never be enough funding to satisfy the tax spenders’ appetite. Their whine for more will continue to be more shrill and demanding (see the Nevada teachers’ union, college and university elites and the rest of the tax spender crowd for your examples).
Ideally, those with further refinement or even out right opposition to this proposal will engage in building a dialogue to improve or offer an alternative solution to Nevada’s funding system. Whether in comments supplied here or through other forms of public exchange…
In the post, “Taking A Different Approach To Nevada’s Tax System” I attempted to offer a replacement state revenue collection system to the present methods used. In that approach I suggested that every Nevada citizen above the age of 18 would pay a flat amount of taxes (I used the figure $8,000, per year, but that is simply a number suggested and not a fixed amount that is based on any rationale). I also maintain that whatever the amount to be levied would be paid in quarterly installments by each taxpayer. This is intended to make the act of paying the tax as memorable as possible – not something hidden in every purchase or imposed as a percentage on the payrolls paid by employers.
After watching the stream of tax spenders come to the witness table of the Nevada Legislature’s Interim Finance Committee to make their case for why they shouldn’t be required to go without any funding that they currently receive (never mind the $900 Million hole of spending exceeding tax revenue)…it became crystal clear that not enough Nevadans are paying taxes to recognize the level of responsibility required to finance the spending desired (and thought to be a requirement). With the current system, too many people rely on other people’s money and are convinced that they are entitled to be spending it. This is further reinforced by political leaders who see government as the ends to filling all societal needs and who are elected to their positions of authority/power on the basis that they will be there for the tax spenders, delivering the goods through the extractions of those who can be nailed as the targets for making the payments.
From the hole in the budget, caused by spending more than tax revenues yielded, the message should be obvious that instead of taxing to the need for spending – an opposite and more responsible approach would be to determine an agreed upon amount of tax revenue…distribute the burden equally on all Nevada citizens…and then spend on an agreed upon priority basis, with that limitation being the known amount of money to spend. Those who seek or need services not within the scope of the priorities for spending will be able to work out alternative solutions to find how to get what government can no longer afford to carry out. The private sector would have signals of need where they would be able to fashion business models that might fit a new venture in providing a service or product that now is not part of the mix for government to do.
Without a change in the organizational direction of Nevada’s financial approach, there will never be enough funding to satisfy the tax spenders’ appetite. Their whine for more will continue to be more shrill and demanding (see the Nevada teachers’ union, college and university elites and the rest of the tax spender crowd for your examples).
Ideally, those with further refinement or even out right opposition to this proposal will engage in building a dialogue to improve or offer an alternative solution to Nevada’s funding system. Whether in comments supplied here or through other forms of public exchange…
Posted by Doug Busselman at 2/21/2010 7:30 PM 
Categories: Nevada
Tags: Nevada Legislative Special Session Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes
Categories: Nevada
Tags: Nevada Legislative Special Session Nevada Budget State Spending Taxes
Comments