I Might Actually Pay Myself to Work
It's true, I might actually pay part of my own salary, isn't that a little silly? Now, I don't live in the city where I work, so my property taxes don't go to paying my salary, but what about my federal income tax that trickles down in the form of grants and other such things?
It's not just librarians either. What about teachers who live in the district where they work? Or firemen, or cops, or environmental investigators, or G-men? Doesn't this seem like a massive hemorrhage of money? Why should someone who's salary is paid for through income tax, have to pay income tax? They (or rather, we) pay our taxes so that someone else can tally them up (and get paid to do it!) and then give them back in the form of wages. Surely it would make more sense to simply not take the money out in the first place, and adjust our wages accordingly.
How hard would it be to discover how much money a government worker is paying themselves and get rid of it. It's a wash. Actually, what should be a zero sum game is not. Am I alone thinking this is extremely inefficient?
In relation to libraries, I'm just wondering how much money could be saved (here to be read as "spent on other expenses") if we take out the cost of this middle man. Unfortunately, I'm not good enough at math (here to be read "I'm much too lazy") to figure it out. But, on the surface, doesn't it seem to just make sense? Anyone?
2 comments:
Alot about taxes don't make sense. That's why I support the Fair Tax: www.fairtax.org.
We were just talking about this in the form of a tax Arlington will vote on in the upcoming election. We can vote to raise sales tax, and the money will go to buy equipment for police; therefore, moneys are freed up to pay more police. Or we vote against it and they raise the property tax later and the same outcome. If they'd just give us the discount my husband could buy his own back up weapon, taser holster, whatever... ROCK THE VOTE!
Julianna
Post a Comment