Tuesday, 01-18-11, 10:33:11pm Last week I failed to mention one of my favorite arguments from government-for-all-seasons types. It’s reflected in the title of that Dispatch story I cited: Protesters rally to protect safety-net services.
What’s a “safety-net service,” exactly? Bulletproof tenure and longevity raises, come Hell or high water? Eighteen bucks an hour for data entry or filing paperwork? Generous defined-benefit retirement plans? Ted Strickland, co-founder of a new think tank called Innovation Ohio and newest member of the Washington, D.C. Bipartisan Policy Center’s Health Project, had this to say upon passage of Obamacare:
No longer will insurance companies decide who gets quality health care in this country and who does not. [...] I applaud Congress for standing up for Ohioans’ right to affordable, quality health care. And I admire President Obama for his leadership in achieving comprehensive health care reform.
My ellipsis skips a lot of promises, but the first one alone is a bank-breaker. How is insurance really “insurance” if “insurers” have no control over their risk? Oh well; Strickland knows a thing or two about what government can and cannot afford. The health care bill is just the latest, largest example of politicians writing checks the taxpayers will be forced to cash.
This horrifying little graphic was featured in yesterday’s aptly titled USA Today story, Our view on public pensions: Lavish benefits hurt states:
Keep that $19.5 billion unfunded liability in mind when you hear protesters bellowing about evil Republican cuts to the “safety net.” Should taxpayers suffer so unreasonable public pension promises can be kept? At some point, the entitlement and public employee safety net stopped being for safety and became just a net. A couple of charts from The Tax Foundation clarify Ohio’s recent history of taxation and spending:
Ohio politicians have fallen into a common trap: who wouldn’t be generous, given a bag of other people’s money? Governor Kasich is right to keep higher taxes off the table. As for the “safety net” and a certain audience’s insistence that it surround us all: charity’s a task ill-suited for government. The big question today is whether our new governor and the General Assembly can cut enough netting for Ohioans to stay here willingly!
5 responses so far ↓
[...] not that the member groups of One Ohio Now are bad. The problem is that they’re wrong – wrong about higher taxes being the solution to Ohio’s problems, and wrong to demand taxpayer funds for everything. Of the charities listed above, how much more [...]
[...] I ought to establish my own union! We’ll start by targeting the members of AFSCME Local 11 — 30,870 workers, as of their 2009 annual report. I won’t give a dime of the members’ money to politicians or Policy Matters Ohio (“a Cleveland research group,” in the words of The Columbus Dispatch), and as a matter of fact I won’t take dues at all. There: instant 1.25% raise for everyone! As bonuses I also won’t offer a Ponzi scheme retirement plan, or lobby for selfish, short-sighted policies that will make Ohio financially weaker. [...]
[...] openly call for higher taxes – but that’s exactly what SB 5 opponents are demanding. Will government ever be big enough for these [...]
Ranking the states doesn't specifically say much about what Ohioans are actually paying. We could be paying less, since we have been getting Taft-era income tax cuts for several years running. Are we saying the other states are cutting more? That could explain the re-ranking, but it doesn't support the statement I clicked on to get here. It doesn't support a belief that Ohioans are taxed more. Also, maybe you could update the chart to cover 2011 (it is out of date by 3 years as I write this).
As noted, the charts at the end of this post are from the Tax Foundation; they appear outdated because data aren't available immediately. For more from the Tax Foundation, visit http://taxfoundation.org/ – thanks!