Coercion to fund your dreams is immoral

Robert Pratt photo Copyright Pratt on Texas

Robert Pratt

This world is chock full of people who want to realize their dreams with other people’s money. Such is the desire of most teenagers because they are not yet independent of parents but why do so many not grow out of this? Isn’t that part of becoming an adult, making one’s own way?

Certainly we see this desire to use other people’s money expressed through government. From citizens pushing to use tax money for rather specific use projects like park splash pads to subsidized convention center hotels, many seem untroubled by using the resources of other people to realize their dreams even when most of those who will be taxed will not likely ever make use of the desired asset.

There are generic public goods for which it is appropriate to use tax money. The most appropriate are those things which essentially exist to protect and preserve the primary wealth and safety of the citizenry. Examples would be police and fire service.

Then there is a middle ground of what is most often called infrastructure where the idea is that most of a society benefits whether or not they make use of the so-called public good. However, it is all too common to claim some things as universally beneficial which are ephemeral or limited in benefit to the public at large.

The most abused by spending-other-people’s-money-proponents is where true needs of a population are confused with electives to be enjoyed by only a few.

For example, a drainage project needed for the benefit of one neighborhood when others have good drainage which was properly built when development was done and for which all lot owners paid in the price of their land. It’s not right that those who got through on the cheap are then able to pass along their failures to taxpayers at large.

The most abused by spending-other-people’s-money-proponents is where true needs of a population are confused with electives to be enjoyed by only a few.

For example, a town may need a generic meeting hall to use for political gatherings which also has side benefits of use for endless other functions. But that’s not the same as claiming a need of  a purpose built concert hall which benefits only those who pay to attend concerts.

Realize your dreams but remember that the use of coercion to fund such is immoral.

What do you think?...

© Pratt on Texas / Perstruo Texas, Inc.