Levying taxes

NOTE: I wrote this in one sitting today. It started as a bullet point, but an hour later had amounted to this. I’ve been very bogged down, worrying about the quality of my writing and refusing to publish anything. Recently, I’ve decided to just release everything, even when not fully satisfactory, just for the sake of it. If you have thoughts on this, please contact me via socials!

From a vacuum thinking standpoint1, I don’t think I would mind paying additional taxes. Perhaps I haven’t reached a certain level of attainable wealth to feel repercussions, yet in my mind, it seems like a baseline duty of a civic citizen.

If we were to compare how much in taxes a middle-class family in Maryland must pay as opposed to a divorced businessman in Texas, the comparison does seem like the thief of joy. On the contrary, I am reminded of how Americans declared independence and revolted due to notions like taxation without representation, where the tax was 1%. Today in America, it is closer to 10-40%, depending on your tax bracket. Even so, 0-55%+ in other parts of the world.

Well, yes, times have changed; the scope of governance and those we govern has changed. Perhaps if we were to efficiently optimize with benchmarks and KPIs, surely, we could track our impact more effectively. In one instance, we could focus on how exactly this money is being spent.

Working with certain groups does conclude that, unfortunately, there is government bloat, inefficiency, human greed (everywhere), and a failure to distribute resources. I have always been wary about giving to organizations without a clear, numerated, and measurable impact on the beneficiary. To this end, I prefer quietly, anonymously, and independently working directly alongside those we ought to serve. What gives me additional hope is knowing about others do this too — who are you behind closed doors? I am quite confident in the previous statement. Through paired conviction with action, I’ve learned how much more difficult meaningful execution actually is.

In classes, some of which were taken beyond my will, I was lectured on the importance of wellness, particularly on healthy eating. One would know that nutrition largely dictates a person’s health. The irony was revealed as my instructors were clearly overweight. Now, on the note of health, appearance is not everything, and rather quite a vain metric. And so, rather, we speak of body composition, such as muscle mass, metabolic rate, and skills such as strength and endurance. If I can lift a consistent medium-light set of weights while walking for one hour without experiencing pain the next day, then I am happy. And to the health coach who could not comfortably run a mile in fifteen minutes, who would listen to them? And so, who would be willing to spend on institutional knowledge and outcomes if one could not clearly deliver?

In dreaming of something new, and in innovating, we take these risks at the frontier, where the inherent idea is on things not seen, yet with conviction, we would make certain bets that with a certain team, we can take a chance to make something great in due time. That, in entrepreneurship, is not what I would draw parallels with in this instance of government. In protest, and in dreaming, we set out to create the change we want to see. There are many difficult reasons: resistance from one party, pressure from the other, and a multitude of voices in every which way, each motivated by their own desires and interests, and some from more idealism and theory or the like. Yet a foundational challenge remains in the alignment of the wills of the people, and their ability to execute, often despite misalignment.

Shiny and attractive are the end results – beautiful outcomes that please the public eye. Behind closed doors and situation rooms are days and nights of relentless toil, suffering, sweat, and those who choose to fight. And I will say this: nobody who wishes for outcomes in the absence of personal toil and contribution—each to their own earnest ability—is someone worth following.

When we correctly place our bets on small, lean teams with a track record of excellence, there may be stronger returns. In governance, the idea becomes murky and controversial. In and of itself, increasing taxation could be valuable (pun not intended), yet with these abstracted layers, I am left to question the integrity, intellect, execution speed, and the structure itself. Regardless, I hold steadfast to the verses: “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s” (Matthew 22:21, Mark 12:17), and “Open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor” (Deuteronomy 15:11).