By Edwin Cooney
It was my hope that last week's column would be seen as a lighthearted assessment of the annual lot of taxpayers which would offer a positive and even a creative way of minimizing our annual pain.
There were two separate entities involved in that assessment: you and me.
Your participation was wonderful —top notch, as they say! The highest honor I ever receive as a writer is your feedback from these musings, however painful or gratifying such feedback can be.
My proposal was purely suggestive and, as I see it, almost perfect except that I left out a crucial provision in my proposed federal lottery to both encourage and reward the taxpayer. That part of the proposal should have been that the winnings were tax-free. Nevertheless, the willingness of a half dozen or so of you was not only revealing in your individual outlooks and conditions, it demonstrated to me the complexities of life in twenty-first century America. I'll both discreetly and briefly share the most interesting of these reactions.
A retired teacher in New England insists that she'll never smile while paying her taxes so long as the head of Amazon escapes his responsibility to pay income tax. She, after all, had to "cough up" $5,000 and, apparently, $500 more a month will be coming out of her pension next year. Soon she'll be faced with local taxes. She'll smile, she writes, when there's more of an equality among taxpayer obligations. (Note: it's mighty hard to argue with her!)
A Florida responder who receives Social Security benefits, realizing that he's receiving more than he ever put into government, was grateful to the FBI, the CIA, FEMA, and other federal agencies which protect "...my ass" from all types of natural and humankind disasters.
A Pennsylvania taxpayer said he'd have preferred a column screaming about the inequities in the collection and spending of tax dollars rather than a column urging him to smile when he pays his taxes. He wondered if the winnings would be taxable, how much they would be, and how many payments there would be. Mostly, he was unhappy that we spend billions on weapons and begrudge the mere millions we ought to be spending for a national healthcare system. In short, he wanted my proposed program spelled out verbatim — and I haven't yet even been elected to Congress!
A magazine editor from the state of Washington (at least that's where I think he comes from) very much enjoyed my outlook and my proposal. He asserted that it has more to argue for it than it has to argue against it.
The most delicious response I got was from a former military man with whom I used to imbibe at my old Alameda, California watering hole. He now lives in Colorado. He wrote simply: don't compare the private citizen with the soldier. When I reminded him that the Founding Fathers did just that by insisting that the Commander-in-Chief of the Army be a civilian rather than a soldier and inviting him to elaborate on his position, he simply refused by wishing me and my family a happy Easter. Apparently, my former drinking buddy believes that a soldier, or a warrior, is more worthy of tax benefits than John and Susie Q citizen.
The bottom line is this: my greatest reward is realized when I stimulate thought through one of these columns. A willingness to forgo opinion and rethink past conclusions is often too arduous and painful for most people.
Sunday, June 16th will mark my fifteenth anniversary writing these columns. The purpose of each column is to accomplish at least one of three things. They are to inform, to stimulate thought, and to entertain the reader.
As for you, the reader — without you, the verdict is simple: there is no column!
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY
No comments:
Post a Comment