Hacker News Reader

Comment by raleec | Hacker News Reader

I think the point is that the elite benefit from the public services even if we do not use them directly. E.g. if we work in an office building we benefit from the services that allowed the worker vacuuming to be there, though we didn't necessarily take the bus there ourselves. [edit] but this is not to say that anyone should be restricted unduly.

View on HN

First of all, if the worker is a taxpayer, the employer is already paying for those services in the form of pre-tax wages. I pay for my own police protection, and I raise my wage commensurately [1]. This is all included in the cost of labor.

Secondly, most government spending does not provide those necessary services. Roads, police and water are just not very expensive. Most government spending is just transfers from the wealthy to the less wealthy - see my second link in my previous post.

[1] Actually, my landlord pays for police protection, and has raised my rent commensurately.

Most of the cleaning service people are not really taxpayers[1], which is why including them distorts the equation. They are benefiting w/out contributing, and we do in fact, need them. Also reinforcing my point, How can you claim that Defense is the only public good in the top 5? What percentage of the population must benefit to qualify?

[1]From other IRS data, we can see that in 2008, around 52 million tax returns were filed with either positive or negative AGI that used exemptions, deductions and tax credits to completely wipe out their federal income tax liability. Not only did they get back every dollar that the federal government withheld from their paychecks during 2008, but some even received more back from the IRS.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com