Hacker News Reader

Comment by japherwocky | Hacker News Reader

Take it one step further and let people specify what their money goes to. Automate the politicians!

It seems like a nice idea on the face of it, but apart from the inevitable chaos which comes from having budgets of government departments fluctuate wildly from year to year, I think it would lead to a world where government departments spend about half their time and money begging taxpayers for money.

Every television ad for the first four months of the year would probably be some variation on:

"Remember, the FBI does good work! Be sure to remember to contribute to the FBI on your next tax return!"

That may still be better than the status quo.

Seems like a happy medium would be that I get to choose where 10 or 5 percent of my taxes go. The politicians can expect a certain cut, with the rest we're empowered to fund what we believe in.

I also don't realistically believe this will ever happen.

If you feel strongly about it, why not donate five or ten percent of your income to the government department of your choice?

Not a bad idea. Although, I wouldn't be surprised if there were regulations against this.

Or invest it in a company which is doing something that you want to support.

Honestly, the receipts for MOST businesses are fairly predictable (within 10-20%, at least), so why would we think that the government would be any different?

Also, I'm not sure why making government departments beg for money and have to live in the free market is on the face of it a bad thing. Would it be any different than the current system, where politicians beg us for money while promising to allocate our taxes a particular way, but then usually fail to follow through completely on? Having the departments beg for money directly seems more efficient somehow.

Of course, I think what would really suffer is bold new infrastructure programs. People would be willing to allocate money to roads once a couple high profile bridges collapse, but would we ever see a space elevator?

Would be nice, but what happens when you contribute to a government program? Nothing. Your money is far too small to have any effect and you will likely receive a particular service whether you personally contribute or not. With a business, you get what you pay for. Fast.

I'd rather see ads for the FBI than for political parties!

You'll get those too. Government departments from November to April, political parties from April to November.

(The rest of the time it'll still be ads for medications for diseases you never knew you had.)

One argument against it is that it wouldn't be very democratic. If I have 10K in taxes and you have 5K in taxes, who has the more votes?

À la carte governance might be a good idea (though it sounds likely to produce the largest expansion of the IRS anyone has ever seen), but is there any empirical information on the use of such a system in governance? It is not too much to ask that the idea be tested and proven on smaller levels.

They would just vote for transferring money from people making more than themselves into their own pockets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com