Hacker News Reader

Comment by turc1656 | Hacker News Reader

"This is all part of the long-standing "taxation is theft" meme that infected the USA in the late 1970s and early 1980s"

No, it's not. This is all part of the scam politicians have been running on the public for decades. Namely taking taxpayer money earmarked for specific purposes (i.e. maintenance) and then not using it for those things. Then they turn around and say "we don't have enough money, we need to raise taxes to pay for these unforeseen costs", even though the costs were completely and entirely foreseeable. Also, let's not forget the egregious waste on construction that is rampant in publicly funded projects, with NYC being the worst offender of them all. Case in point - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/nyregion/new-york-subway-...

View on HN

I agree with you, however, how would you propose that we ensure compliance in respect to money being used for intended purposes?

Kinda hate to say it because of the current level of hype making it always sound buzzwordy, but a blockchain or something similar could be legitimately useful here. The issue is getting government entities to agree to strict accountability.

Privatization.

Didn't we give telcos a ton of money in the 90s to ensure fiber to the premises everywhere? How did that work out? Privatization still requires oversight.

We did it with phones in general and the cost of service plummeted as the quality rose.

That's just the telco taking credit for what microchip manufacturers have achieved.

First, we didn't do that.[1] Second, the telecoms were already privatized, so what the 90s were about was deregulation, which is different. Third, while it's true that privatization (as well as deregulation) requires oversight, it's been quite successful in other countries in the transit sector. Japan's transit sector is highly privatized, for example, and mostly unsubsidized. The EU has called for deregulation of rail service by 2020: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-strike/rail-strike....

[1] I don't want to derail the thread, but you can search on HN for the past discussion. Also, whatever we did worked fine. Out of the G7 countries, we're #2 in fiber penetration, behind Japan.

They can legally bind the revenue to expenditure purposes when they pass the spending bills. I have actually seen this in a few states and municipalities. I believe NJ passed something within the last year or two legally binding revenue from a specific tax to be spent by a certain legislative authority. If I recall, it was related to the gas tax - they increased it and they said everything must be spent by whatever government entity is responsible for highway maintenance (DOT I think?). That way there is no legal way (without another bill being passed) for politicians to use the money for some other purpose. It's still possible that the DOT squanders the money through mismanagement, but at least it would still be spent on roads and infrastructure, as intended.

Same way that private corporations ensure money is spent where it is intended to be spent.

Fire (read: impeach/do not re-elect) those that do not their job by spending money not for its intended purpose. Discover this by regular, full, public audits.

Prosecute those who commit embezzlement and larceny and send the to prison if convicted. Make them serve long prison stints with no hope of parole for having violated their position of public trust and bar them from holding public office or lobbying positions on penalty of more punitive prison time.

Laws with criminal penalties.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com