7 ms·

Where Anti-Tax Fervor Means ‘All Services Will Cease’

38 points by iamjeff 9y ago

sundvor 9y ago
From someone of a Norwegian/Australian background, what the whole article describes is simply alien. People just aren't that selfish on a grand scale in either of my home countries. Clearly, none of the non-voters ever read Matilda. Or understand that ultimately, the lack of public services will put everyone back.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  These areas need to be dis-incorporated. They serve no purpose. Ultimately, things like this are probably for the better.
  - thescribe 9y ago
    If the residents are happy with the change isn't it serving a purpose to them?
- oceanghost 9y ago
  As a Norweigan, you may not be in possession of certain facts about the US politics. 1. Almost all media in the US is severely biased. 2. This to me at least looks like something called the "national parks strategy." This is when the government funds its unpopular pet projects (frequently theft), and underfunds popular programs such as national parks, roads and the like then threatens the public with their closure if they do not pass tax increases. Frequently, if the tax is passed, they do a show project and misallocate the rest of the money. Over the time citizens have become wise and vote--entirely rationally-- for the safest option which is, no new taxes. California is in the midst of such a battle now: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/californians-rebel-against-gas-car-tax-hike/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/californians...
  - sundvor 9y ago
    Interesting, thanks for that information.
    - ojbyrne 9y ago
      Just so you know, the washington times is a radical right wing publication. I live in California, and the tiny tax increase on vehicles is both a. well below the rate of inflation and b. not enraging people.
      - oceanghost 9y ago
        Well, this only proves my point I suppose. I did not know that-- but amnusingly... I live in Orange County, and believe me the recall is real and it is going to happen.
  - Sanddancer 9y ago
    The media isn't biased as much as you think. It's anti-confrontational, which means stories about things people are upset about often get minified. However, the Washington Times, which you linked to, is fantastically biased. It's owned by the Unification Church, and has been repeatedly criticized for its pro-Moon stance. If you want to know what's really happening, don't read the washington times.
    - throwaway7312 9y ago
      US media is biased. Try this experiment: find a conservative friend and a liberal friend. Ask each of these friends which of the two papers in the parent and OP is more biased and which is more fact-based. Your conservative friend will tell you the Washington Times is more fact-based and the New York Times is heavily biased. Your liberal friend will tell you the New York Times is more fact-based and the Washington Times is heavily biased. Your first conclusion might be that one of your friends (whichever one whose beliefs oppose yours more) is insane or uneducated on what you know is true. The more likely conclusion, however, is that each of these papers weaves heavy amounts of opinion, spin, and perspective on the "facts" it conveys, and that opinion and spin is invisible to those who share the same biases, while being conspicuous and grating to those who do not.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  For perspective, some parts of Oregon are populated by people who moved there from the Old South because they wanted to live somewhere whiter and more conservative, so there are pockets of very strong ideological opposition to any sort of public institutions. As a fellow Euro I really recommend the book American Nations by Colin Woodard (actually also from Oregon) if you want to understand the strange contradictions of US politics. One of the best history books I've read.
- Lazare 9y ago
  There's another point you're missing: The American government is incredibly poorly run. People would probably be much more supportive of paying for government services if they were getting the level of quality and efficiency Norwegian taxpayers get. :)
  - merpnderp 9y ago
    If it weren't for the train wreck that is the VA, and the problems with medicare/medicaid, a lot more people might be in favor of single payer/government health care. But if the government can't correct the VA problems after years of effort and billions in extra funding, how can the government suddenly fix the same problem only 100x larger?
    - Lazare 9y ago
      Yep. A fairly large chunk of the US would quite love to have, eg, the British NHS. Nobody wants to have the VA. Moving from the US to another country it's amazing how well-liked government institutions are, even including the local equivalent of the IRS. And with good reason; they're well run too. In the US, the DMV is a punchline and a staple of standup comedy; a shorthand for the towering, malevolent incompetence of government, but most parts of government would work just as well. You could go years without a positive interaction with the government. It was quite an interesting surprise to learn there are parts of the world where the government functions well and an interaction with them is not to be dreaded.
- thescribe 9y ago
  I suspect you and I are alien with respect to our views, so please don't take this as an attack. I was surprised to hear you describe people voting against continued public service as 'selfish'. Why would you consider them selfish?
  - mirimir 9y ago
    Maybe "selfish" isn't quite right. More like self-interested. Or not community-minded. I'm guessing that those opposed to public services would prefer private services. So perhaps a subscription-based library system. With free services for the poor, funded by donations. But would that provide as much social benefit as a public service? I tend to doubt it. Maybe libraries are a moot point, given the Internet. But the same issues come up for schools, police, fire, roads, bridges, etc. I mean, I have no children, so paying for schools seems like a rip-off sometimes. But on the other hand, I like living in a society that's at least somewhat literate.
    - Consultant32452 9y ago
      Ignore the title, because the questioner is not Bernie Sanders. But this Milton Friedman response to this very question answers your question pretty succinctly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sElz_P6QsZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sElz_P6QsZo
  - sundvor 9y ago
    I define something that is public as being available to use regardless of your standing. If you have e.g. public health system, and public education, at high standards, your chance of success is to a vastly greater degree decoupled from the wealth of your family, or the suburb you live in. The benefit is that society as a whole gets richer, you reduce crime, etc etc. Basically what comes around goes around. To be opposed to having great public benefits e.g. just because you are from a family of great wealth and are unwilling to share some of that for the greater good is thus something I ultimately define as selfish. I also think it is short sighted, as no matter how well off you are the higher the chances you'll be affected by things like crime. Hopefully this explains my thinking.
ericras 9y ago
This piece does a fairly good job of presenting the conservative point of view: that there are mountains of waste in government to cut rather than hike taxes. I agree with that perspective. Unfortunately, as we've seen from Republican-led governments operating under this Grover Norquist-esque model for thirty years, the beast never starves. In Washington DC they print money to offset deficits. Instead of cutting waste, the libraries and the parks are closed. There's still a great desire out there for responsible government that can operate efficiently. That can keep the libraries open by trimming bureaucratic waste rather than asking for more money. Probably will always be a pipe dream.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  I've worked in government in a variety of capacities. The stereotypical waste that is typically cooked up in a drop in the bucket. Waste that you get from the privatization efforts are an order of magnitude more expensive. Unfortunately, the people in policy positions today are clueless... voting no doesn't fix anything.
- brohoolio 9y ago
  My local government is really transparent about the budget, where it's going. They've been running really lean since the great recession. It's really interesting to see how they spend money. There are couple programs I question, but for the most part they do an excellent job. I will say sometimes a few years after these programs are implemented I'm generally a fan. I understand the drive to make government more efficient, run better, but I'm not sure if that's the goal of the current conservative movement. At least here in Michigan the state government under republican control has caused all sorts of issues, like the Flint water crisis.
  - ashark 9y ago
    A couple of my friends are in low-level positions with the state government. At least in their cases, I can say that their offices run so lean that cost-cutting attempts from higher up just lead to worse service and conflicting (or outright illegal) directives, which encourage rule-breaking of a sort that is sure to eventually bite them in the ass in expensive ways.
brohoolio 9y ago
In rural areas this seems like it will kill jobs and make the area less desirable. There always is a balance to strike, not providing too many services at too high a cost, but killing off a library? Not being able to have police? How is someone supposed to apply for a job if they don't have internet? How are they supposed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps? The library provides ways for people to get ahead.
- slackingoff2017 9y ago
  Realistically every person in America can get enough money for a phone with internet access. An older used Android phone can be had for around $50. Internet is free in enough places that a phone with charger is sufficient. A common and incorrect view of the homeless persists in America, to their peril. Destitute starving people exist in some countries but not those as rich as the US. In the US and other wealthy countries basically 100% of chronic homeless are in that position due to drugs or mental illness. A normal person thrown on the street with nothing would be able to scrape together some semblance of a normal life within a few months. This is hurting the homeless in the US greatly. The common view of homelessness as someone just "down on their luck" leads to bad attempts at solutions. Mentally stable adults without drug problems do not stay homeless in the US and rarely become homeless. To help the homeless we need vastly increased spending on mental health and addiction treatment for the poor. We also need socialized housing for those too mentally I'll to ever hold a job. A lot of homeless people will be homeless unless someone pays for a place for them to live indefinitely.
hoodoof 9y ago
I think taxes are good. I don't mind paying taxes at all. I want to support community services and public works and social equality. The only context in which I really really hate paying tax is where I feel that the politicians are looting the public money to enrich themselves and give themselves generous employment benefits well beyond that of ordinary citizens.
- prostoalex 9y ago
  It's more complex than politicians looting for personal enrichment, and it feels like those corruption cases are handled with an occasional FBI arrest here and there. Ever notice how some of the political candidates are supported by some public employee unions, e.g. a candidate supported (and frequently financed) by police, teachers, prison guards, etc.? Well, that same politician, once elected, is frequently in charge of negotiating the public sector compensation and pension benefits. In what might come as a total surprise, they turn out to have very weak negotiating skills when it comes to dealing with unions that invested in their previous rounds. You don't have to look very far - as far as few years ago the city of San Jose had to suspend hiring policemen, and lay off some junior teachers due to funding issues. Meanwhile on the other end of the paycheck spectrum a bunch of public employees were throwing early retirement parties, having locked in a six-figure pension for the rest of their lives http://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/30/bay-areas-200k-club-analysis-finds-fat-pensions-belong-to-nonunion-bosses/ http://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/30/bay-areas-200k-club-an...
  - Clubber 9y ago
    A good example of this is all the union busting the GOP were championing in the 2010s or so. The police and fire unions supported the GOP and the GOP went on to reduce some of the power of the worker's unions. Scott Walker is one of these politicians. The police and fire unions were left unharmed and are still strong. There could be an argument that the strength of the police unions are partially to blame with the issues we are having with police shootings and lack of prosecution, among other things.
maxharris 9y ago
I live a block away from a public library. It's so close that I can see it right outside my window! And you know what? I have not been to that library ever, and I've lived in this neighborhood for years. Even if you happen to use your library every day now, you probably won't be doing that in twenty years, regardless of whether or not they continue to offer service in your town. Taking a wide view, what else should we expect, now that we have computers in our pockets connected to a far larger and more comprehensive source of knowledge? There are a lot of details and small objections to my point here, to be sure, but the technology that's driving this trend is NOT going away.
- anigbrowl 9y ago
  Libraries are more than just books on shelves, they're also community centers. I find your your avowedly uninformed dismissiveness quite depressing.
  - mixmastamyk 9y ago
    Not to mention books bring a depth and historical perspective largely unavailable on the internet, even though it is technically possible to do so.
- felipemnoa 9y ago
  I go to the library almost daily. Plenty of people there. More so than before the internet. A big chunk of them go to use the computers there, study, read the newspaper, or just to socialize a bit. A lot of them are there for other activities: story time for children, yoga, computer classes, movie time. It seems to me that libraries are turning into community centers, which is great. Every community needs a library that doubles as a quasi community center.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- gene-h 9y ago
  You should probably visit your local library. My local library runs a makerspace, where people can check out equipment, arduinos, and use 3d printers. In addition, our local library cards allow us to bypass paywalls for news sites, scientific journals, and check out e-books online without having the physically visit the library. I would really like to see paywalls go away within twenty years, but I am doubtful that this will happen.
ojbyrne 9y ago
"More money in voters’ wallets from tax cuts in Washington could reduce the sting in asking people to pay more at home, or it could just reinforce the idea that all taxes are meant to go down." The latest tax plan that was floated means very few people in states like Oregon (with high state taxes) are going to see any reduction, because they're going to make those state taxes non-deductible. Not sure how that plays into this argument.
- scarface74 9y ago
  State taxes already aren't tax deductible for the middle class. The standard deduction for a married couple is $12000. If you have a mortgage on average price house* ($185,000), you're not clearing enough in mortgage interest and state taxes to make itemizing worthwhile. I know there are other deductions, but I still doubt that the average middle income household ($60,000/year) is clearing over $12,000 in deductions. http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/ http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/ http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4957604 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4957604
rrggrr 9y ago
“Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change." - Milton Friedman Age 45 and up comprises the smallest number of HN readers, the largest number of Americans, the largest quantity of American voters, and the greatest concentration of wealth in America. This, majority demographic will support real change when there is no other option, but not before then. Most refuse to admit their generations enacted public policies that have left most cites States and the Federal Government irreversibly in debt. Milton Friedman also said, "When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around." Its critical that today's emerging leaders are well educated on what makes for sustainable economic and social policy, and what is required to dig ourselves out from the hole dug for us.
- danjayh 9y ago
  Much of the problem lies with future unfunded obligations in Social Security. When Social Security was enacted, the average life expectancy was 61 and the full retirement age was 65 - the average person died before getting a dime. This is no longer the case, and it's why the program is going bankrupt. I, at 35 years of age, am not planning to ever receive social security & am saving at a rate that reflects that (slightly over Dave Ramsey's recommended 15%). I will vote ASAP to raise the full retirement age to 84, which is 4 years after the national average life expectancy of 79. Doing this will fill in a significant portion of the hole that prior generations have dug. I would also support raising the retirement age for women to a higher value than that for men, due to the difference in life expectancy. Equal opportunity to collect, and all (ducks head to dodge flying objects). OK, maybe I'm half kidding about that, but dead serious about everything else.
  - rrggrr 9y ago
    Underfunded State pensions are an even bigger problem. Insurmountable actually.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
crusso 9y ago
Local, State, and Federal government spending as a percentage of the GDP continue to creep upward. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1900_2020USp_XXs2li111tcn_F0xF0sF0lF0f_Federal_State_and_Local_Spending_in_20th_Century http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1900_2020... It's surprising that the closing of some library branches is somehow the fault of overly paranoid tax-haters rather than out-of-control spending patterns.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

38 points by iamjeff 9y ago

From someone of a Norwegian/Australian background, what the whole article describes is simply alien. People just aren't that selfish on a grand scale in either of my home countries. Clearly, none of the non-voters ever read Matilda. Or understand that ultimately, the lack of public services will put everyone back.

Spooky23 9y ago
These areas need to be dis-incorporated. They serve no purpose. Ultimately, things like this are probably for the better.
- thescribe 9y ago
  If the residents are happy with the change isn't it serving a purpose to them?
oceanghost 9y ago
As a Norweigan, you may not be in possession of certain facts about the US politics. 1. Almost all media in the US is severely biased. 2. This to me at least looks like something called the "national parks strategy." This is when the government funds its unpopular pet projects (frequently theft), and underfunds popular programs such as national parks, roads and the like then threatens the public with their closure if they do not pass tax increases. Frequently, if the tax is passed, they do a show project and misallocate the rest of the money. Over the time citizens have become wise and vote--entirely rationally-- for the safest option which is, no new taxes. California is in the midst of such a battle now: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/californians-rebel-against-gas-car-tax-hike/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/californians...
- sundvor 9y ago
  Interesting, thanks for that information.
  - ojbyrne 9y ago
    Just so you know, the washington times is a radical right wing publication. I live in California, and the tiny tax increase on vehicles is both a. well below the rate of inflation and b. not enraging people.
    - oceanghost 9y ago
      Well, this only proves my point I suppose. I did not know that-- but amnusingly... I live in Orange County, and believe me the recall is real and it is going to happen.
- Sanddancer 9y ago
  The media isn't biased as much as you think. It's anti-confrontational, which means stories about things people are upset about often get minified. However, the Washington Times, which you linked to, is fantastically biased. It's owned by the Unification Church, and has been repeatedly criticized for its pro-Moon stance. If you want to know what's really happening, don't read the washington times.
  - throwaway7312 9y ago
    US media is biased. Try this experiment: find a conservative friend and a liberal friend. Ask each of these friends which of the two papers in the parent and OP is more biased and which is more fact-based. Your conservative friend will tell you the Washington Times is more fact-based and the New York Times is heavily biased. Your liberal friend will tell you the New York Times is more fact-based and the Washington Times is heavily biased. Your first conclusion might be that one of your friends (whichever one whose beliefs oppose yours more) is insane or uneducated on what you know is true. The more likely conclusion, however, is that each of these papers weaves heavy amounts of opinion, spin, and perspective on the "facts" it conveys, and that opinion and spin is invisible to those who share the same biases, while being conspicuous and grating to those who do not.
anigbrowl 9y ago
For perspective, some parts of Oregon are populated by people who moved there from the Old South because they wanted to live somewhere whiter and more conservative, so there are pockets of very strong ideological opposition to any sort of public institutions. As a fellow Euro I really recommend the book American Nations by Colin Woodard (actually also from Oregon) if you want to understand the strange contradictions of US politics. One of the best history books I've read.
Lazare 9y ago
There's another point you're missing: The American government is incredibly poorly run. People would probably be much more supportive of paying for government services if they were getting the level of quality and efficiency Norwegian taxpayers get. :)
- merpnderp 9y ago
  If it weren't for the train wreck that is the VA, and the problems with medicare/medicaid, a lot more people might be in favor of single payer/government health care. But if the government can't correct the VA problems after years of effort and billions in extra funding, how can the government suddenly fix the same problem only 100x larger?
  - Lazare 9y ago
    Yep. A fairly large chunk of the US would quite love to have, eg, the British NHS. Nobody wants to have the VA. Moving from the US to another country it's amazing how well-liked government institutions are, even including the local equivalent of the IRS. And with good reason; they're well run too. In the US, the DMV is a punchline and a staple of standup comedy; a shorthand for the towering, malevolent incompetence of government, but most parts of government would work just as well. You could go years without a positive interaction with the government. It was quite an interesting surprise to learn there are parts of the world where the government functions well and an interaction with them is not to be dreaded.
thescribe 9y ago
I suspect you and I are alien with respect to our views, so please don't take this as an attack. I was surprised to hear you describe people voting against continued public service as 'selfish'. Why would you consider them selfish?
- mirimir 9y ago
  Maybe "selfish" isn't quite right. More like self-interested. Or not community-minded. I'm guessing that those opposed to public services would prefer private services. So perhaps a subscription-based library system. With free services for the poor, funded by donations. But would that provide as much social benefit as a public service? I tend to doubt it. Maybe libraries are a moot point, given the Internet. But the same issues come up for schools, police, fire, roads, bridges, etc. I mean, I have no children, so paying for schools seems like a rip-off sometimes. But on the other hand, I like living in a society that's at least somewhat literate.
  - Consultant32452 9y ago
    Ignore the title, because the questioner is not Bernie Sanders. But this Milton Friedman response to this very question answers your question pretty succinctly. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sElz_P6QsZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sElz_P6QsZo
- sundvor 9y ago
  I define something that is public as being available to use regardless of your standing. If you have e.g. public health system, and public education, at high standards, your chance of success is to a vastly greater degree decoupled from the wealth of your family, or the suburb you live in. The benefit is that society as a whole gets richer, you reduce crime, etc etc. Basically what comes around goes around. To be opposed to having great public benefits e.g. just because you are from a family of great wealth and are unwilling to share some of that for the greater good is thus something I ultimately define as selfish. I also think it is short sighted, as no matter how well off you are the higher the chances you'll be affected by things like crime. Hopefully this explains my thinking.

ericras 9y ago

This piece does a fairly good job of presenting the conservative point of view: that there are mountains of waste in government to cut rather than hike taxes. I agree with that perspective. Unfortunately, as we've seen from Republican-led governments operating under this Grover Norquist-esque model for thirty years, the beast never starves. In Washington DC they print money to offset deficits. Instead of cutting waste, the libraries and the parks are closed. There's still a great desire out there for responsible government that can operate efficiently. That can keep the libraries open by trimming bureaucratic waste rather than asking for more money. Probably will always be a pipe dream.

Spooky23 9y ago
I've worked in government in a variety of capacities. The stereotypical waste that is typically cooked up in a drop in the bucket. Waste that you get from the privatization efforts are an order of magnitude more expensive. Unfortunately, the people in policy positions today are clueless... voting no doesn't fix anything.
brohoolio 9y ago
My local government is really transparent about the budget, where it's going. They've been running really lean since the great recession. It's really interesting to see how they spend money. There are couple programs I question, but for the most part they do an excellent job. I will say sometimes a few years after these programs are implemented I'm generally a fan. I understand the drive to make government more efficient, run better, but I'm not sure if that's the goal of the current conservative movement. At least here in Michigan the state government under republican control has caused all sorts of issues, like the Flint water crisis.
- ashark 9y ago
  A couple of my friends are in low-level positions with the state government. At least in their cases, I can say that their offices run so lean that cost-cutting attempts from higher up just lead to worse service and conflicting (or outright illegal) directives, which encourage rule-breaking of a sort that is sure to eventually bite them in the ass in expensive ways.

brohoolio 9y ago

In rural areas this seems like it will kill jobs and make the area less desirable. There always is a balance to strike, not providing too many services at too high a cost, but killing off a library? Not being able to have police? How is someone supposed to apply for a job if they don't have internet? How are they supposed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps? The library provides ways for people to get ahead.

slackingoff2017 9y ago
Realistically every person in America can get enough money for a phone with internet access. An older used Android phone can be had for around $50. Internet is free in enough places that a phone with charger is sufficient. A common and incorrect view of the homeless persists in America, to their peril. Destitute starving people exist in some countries but not those as rich as the US. In the US and other wealthy countries basically 100% of chronic homeless are in that position due to drugs or mental illness. A normal person thrown on the street with nothing would be able to scrape together some semblance of a normal life within a few months. This is hurting the homeless in the US greatly. The common view of homelessness as someone just "down on their luck" leads to bad attempts at solutions. Mentally stable adults without drug problems do not stay homeless in the US and rarely become homeless. To help the homeless we need vastly increased spending on mental health and addiction treatment for the poor. We also need socialized housing for those too mentally I'll to ever hold a job. A lot of homeless people will be homeless unless someone pays for a place for them to live indefinitely.

hoodoof 9y ago

I think taxes are good. I don't mind paying taxes at all. I want to support community services and public works and social equality. The only context in which I really really hate paying tax is where I feel that the politicians are looting the public money to enrich themselves and give themselves generous employment benefits well beyond that of ordinary citizens.

prostoalex 9y ago
It's more complex than politicians looting for personal enrichment, and it feels like those corruption cases are handled with an occasional FBI arrest here and there. Ever notice how some of the political candidates are supported by some public employee unions, e.g. a candidate supported (and frequently financed) by police, teachers, prison guards, etc.? Well, that same politician, once elected, is frequently in charge of negotiating the public sector compensation and pension benefits. In what might come as a total surprise, they turn out to have very weak negotiating skills when it comes to dealing with unions that invested in their previous rounds. You don't have to look very far - as far as few years ago the city of San Jose had to suspend hiring policemen, and lay off some junior teachers due to funding issues. Meanwhile on the other end of the paycheck spectrum a bunch of public employees were throwing early retirement parties, having locked in a six-figure pension for the rest of their lives http://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/30/bay-areas-200k-club-analysis-finds-fat-pensions-belong-to-nonunion-bosses/ http://www.mercurynews.com/2012/08/30/bay-areas-200k-club-an...
- Clubber 9y ago
  A good example of this is all the union busting the GOP were championing in the 2010s or so. The police and fire unions supported the GOP and the GOP went on to reduce some of the power of the worker's unions. Scott Walker is one of these politicians. The police and fire unions were left unharmed and are still strong. There could be an argument that the strength of the police unions are partially to blame with the issues we are having with police shootings and lack of prosecution, among other things.

maxharris 9y ago

I live a block away from a public library. It's so close that I can see it right outside my window! And you know what? I have not been to that library ever, and I've lived in this neighborhood for years. Even if you happen to use your library every day now, you probably won't be doing that in twenty years, regardless of whether or not they continue to offer service in your town. Taking a wide view, what else should we expect, now that we have computers in our pockets connected to a far larger and more comprehensive source of knowledge? There are a lot of details and small objections to my point here, to be sure, but the technology that's driving this trend is NOT going away.

anigbrowl 9y ago
Libraries are more than just books on shelves, they're also community centers. I find your your avowedly uninformed dismissiveness quite depressing.
- mixmastamyk 9y ago
  Not to mention books bring a depth and historical perspective largely unavailable on the internet, even though it is technically possible to do so.
felipemnoa 9y ago
I go to the library almost daily. Plenty of people there. More so than before the internet. A big chunk of them go to use the computers there, study, read the newspaper, or just to socialize a bit. A lot of them are there for other activities: story time for children, yoga, computer classes, movie time. It seems to me that libraries are turning into community centers, which is great. Every community needs a library that doubles as a quasi community center.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
gene-h 9y ago
You should probably visit your local library. My local library runs a makerspace, where people can check out equipment, arduinos, and use 3d printers. In addition, our local library cards allow us to bypass paywalls for news sites, scientific journals, and check out e-books online without having the physically visit the library. I would really like to see paywalls go away within twenty years, but I am doubtful that this will happen.

ojbyrne 9y ago

"More money in voters’ wallets from tax cuts in Washington could reduce the sting in asking people to pay more at home, or it could just reinforce the idea that all taxes are meant to go down." The latest tax plan that was floated means very few people in states like Oregon (with high state taxes) are going to see any reduction, because they're going to make those state taxes non-deductible. Not sure how that plays into this argument.

scarface74 9y ago
State taxes already aren't tax deductible for the middle class. The standard deduction for a married couple is $12000. If you have a mortgage on average price house* ($185,000), you're not clearing enough in mortgage interest and state taxes to make itemizing worthwhile. I know there are other deductions, but I still doubt that the average middle income household ($60,000/year) is clearing over $12,000 in deductions. http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/ http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/ http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4957604 http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4957604

rrggrr 9y ago

“Only a crisis - actual or perceived - produces real change." - Milton Friedman Age 45 and up comprises the smallest number of HN readers, the largest number of Americans, the largest quantity of American voters, and the greatest concentration of wealth in America. This, majority demographic will support real change when there is no other option, but not before then. Most refuse to admit their generations enacted public policies that have left most cites States and the Federal Government irreversibly in debt. Milton Friedman also said, "When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around." Its critical that today's emerging leaders are well educated on what makes for sustainable economic and social policy, and what is required to dig ourselves out from the hole dug for us.

danjayh 9y ago
Much of the problem lies with future unfunded obligations in Social Security. When Social Security was enacted, the average life expectancy was 61 and the full retirement age was 65 - the average person died before getting a dime. This is no longer the case, and it's why the program is going bankrupt. I, at 35 years of age, am not planning to ever receive social security & am saving at a rate that reflects that (slightly over Dave Ramsey's recommended 15%). I will vote ASAP to raise the full retirement age to 84, which is 4 years after the national average life expectancy of 79. Doing this will fill in a significant portion of the hole that prior generations have dug. I would also support raising the retirement age for women to a higher value than that for men, due to the difference in life expectancy. Equal opportunity to collect, and all (ducks head to dodge flying objects). OK, maybe I'm half kidding about that, but dead serious about everything else.
- rrggrr 9y ago
  Underfunded State pensions are an even bigger problem. Insurmountable actually.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

crusso 9y ago

Local, State, and Federal government spending as a percentage of the GDP continue to creep upward. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1900_2020USp_XXs2li111tcn_F0xF0sF0lF0f_Federal_State_and_Local_Spending_in_20th_Century http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/spending_chart_1900_2020... It's surprising that the closing of some library branches is somehow the fault of overly paranoid tax-haters rather than out-of-control spending patterns.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]