pull down to refresh

How I read this is that any broad tax (perhaps not use-taxes) is always unsustainable -- it is passed and levied with the intent to fund a set of outlays, but in the passing, leaders have a strong incentive to underestimate how large the outlay will be ("it's only going to cost" is much more palatable than "if we don't spend it all, we'll give it back") and people seem to be more willing to vote for taxes that do new things than taxes that fix budgeting mistakes. So taxes seem to me to doomed to chase outlays.

I don't think there is a way to rectify this short of something that looks like making it illegal for governments to fail to adhere to a balanced budget. Unfortunately, I seem to remember the balanced budget conversation of the 90s turning into the debt ceiling conversation of the last decade.

They could just use Kickstarter campaigns for new stuff, rather than theft.

reply

spin off the national parks -- I'd pay a subscription -- and sell most of the gov land. Certainly valuable property in downtown DC that should be on the market

reply
48 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 1h

I wonder what the real subscription cost would be like. Some of the parks are spendy to enter.

reply

I'm sure how reflective current entrance fees are of plausible market rates.

In a lightly maintained park that has no alternative commercial uses, I imagine fees could be very low.

If the land has other uses, then you need to outbid all of them to keep it a park.

reply

Reducing the federal real estate footprint is actually a big priority for this administration but it’s not getting as much attention as the other stuff.

reply