Friday, February 12, 2010

Anti-Tax Post Without a Title

I suppose I'm one of those evil people who dislikes paying taxes. You might think that I'm greedy. You might think that I want to horde all of my millions for myself so as to buy nice things and watch the poor get poorer.

You might. But it ain't true. I'm no millionaire and I've been known to give. Just the other day, in fact, I gave two bucks to some high-as-a-kite hooligan at the gas station so that she could make it home. Two bucks is generous. (Excuse me while I pat myself on the shoulder. Pat, Pat, Pat.)

Now I will explain to you in one simple sentence, the only reason I don't like paying taxes: The government, which includes BOTH Republicats and Demicrans, spends too damn much.

Would you care for a legitimate case to make my legitimate point?  The 2010 census. Did you know that the census people spent $340 million on advertising? $340 million! That controversial Superbowl commercial, at $1.2 million, was just a drop in the you-know-what bucket.

Now. If India can count 1.2 BILLION people without a $320 million advertising budget, we certainly can count a few hundred million for less.


Here's more anti-government spending ammo, just in case you cannot think of any on your own:
California Wine Train Project
Goldman Sachs et al. bailout

8 comments:

outnumberedthreetoone said...

Anti-government spending ammo is the only thing the there is a surplus of. :) Here's another one in case you need some firing up...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/25/cbsnews_investigates/main6140406.shtml

Jessica said...

Oh, dear Rabid. You really thought that girl was gonna use your two bucks to get home? Sucker!

Kidding. Totally did the same thing a couple of weeks ago in a grocery store parking lot when I gave five bucks to some tweeked out lady.

StupidBike said...

One could argue that giving cash to said tweekers actually costs all of more in the long run. Since we pay for all those public servants and institutions

Jessica said...

Oh, it definitely costs more, StupidBike. Not my best choice. It happens sometime, but it's generally better to give money to organizations that provide services. In my opinion, of course.

rabidrunner said...

Sucker is right! I'm such a sucker. Note, however, that she offered to let me see that her gas tank was empty. It went like this:

"Seriously, I'm totally outta gas. You can even come look at it in my car. I just need a few bucks to get me enough gas to get home."

This poor thing spends a lot of time begging for money and offering proof that she really does need the cash for the purpose requested.

And another thing, how on earth does one become comfortable begging for cash? In Utah county of all places! I get why people in India are comfy begging, it's because THEY NEED IT TO SURVIVE and they're raised in a poverty caste that they cannot get out of.

And yet another thing... people handing out cash in Utah county are enabling, which ultimately costs more money in the long run.

See?! It's all my fault that the census people spent $340 million on advertising.

Jessica said...

The story I got was similar. Except she had taken her friend home and now she didn't have enough gas to get herself home.

The enabling thing is definitely true. When I was in Utah last time, I noticed billboards encouraging people not to give money to panhandlers. Mostly because the homeless shelters want to be able provide the services to people. It was interesting to see those billboards in Utah.

Although I shouldn't be surprised 'cause there's all sorts of plastic surgery billboards out there now too. It's like LA!

Aubrey said...

"Anti-tax post without a title."

-priceless.

Anonymous said...

What a great resource!