Skip to main content

How far will statists go to collect taxes? Making senior citizens "work it off"

This in thanks to Will Fox at the Libertarian Party of Delaware listserv:

Towns all over the country have a new idea for collecting property taxes from senior citizens on fixed incomes: put them to work for the town government at low wages to pay off their debts to society.

According to CNN such programs now exist in Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, and South Carolina.

What's truly bizarre is that this is presented as some kind of boon to seniors:

Scott Parkin, spokesman for the National Council on Aging, said the program sounded interesting, as long as it wasn't limited to menial work. "It's certainly in line with what we stand for, keeping seniors involved in work or volunteering as a part of healthy aging," he said.

Boulder County, Colorado, pioneered a tax workoff program in 1986 for residents over 60 and now has about 250 applicants for the fewer than 100 openings, said spokeswoman Barbara Halpin. The work done by the seniors includes landscaping, gathering climate data, clipping newspapers and staffing the courthouse information booth.

"Taxes aren't that high out here, so even at $7 an hour people can burn off their county taxes pretty quickly," Halpin said. She added that many stay in the program as volunteers after paying off their taxes.


These towns are collecting their property taxes from senior citizens through municipal jobs paying roughly $7.00-$8.50/hour.

What I'm wondering is where are all the people who complain that senior citizens having to go take low-paying jobs at McDonalds to make ends meet represents a failure of the "social safety net," but the government paying them the same rate (just to re-collect it as property taxes) somehow becomes a humanitarian initiative.

Comments

Paul Smith Jr. said…
I'd been meaning to post on that as well.

By this logic, taxes can be raised as high as the government wishes, and we can all work second jobs for the government. Retirees shouldn't be forced out of retirement due to government greed. If retires are forced to take out jobs due to taxes, that's an obvious sign taxes are just too high.
Well, at least the US is keeping queers in their place.
Brian Shields said…
Just to play devil's advocate...

If the senior was more responsible during her working lifetime, and built up enough of a nest egg to afford her lifestyle, this wouldn't be an issue.
Brian
Under some circumstances I'd agree with that, but in some parts of the country property values and property tax assessments have been rising so rapidly that there's no real way anybody could have planned to keep up.

Take an example from Maine, about a couple I know personally, who purchased a house 30 years ago for $80K. The assessed value of that house topped $600K around 2004, and the property tax rates there have gone up nine times in the past 20 years.

Of course you could argue that by liquidating their house these people could get out from under their tax debt, but think about the propriety of forcing you to sell property that you've already paid for because the government can continually raise both the taxes and the valuation (even if you have no plans to sell the property).

Something is haywire here.
Paul Smith Jr. said…
The issue Steve raises is apparently a very real on in areas like San Francisco which saw property values (and taxes) explode in the first part of this decade. Seniors who had owned their homes for decades were all of a sudden in a position where their homes had increased in value so much (and taxes had been raised so high) that they couldn't afford the taxes on their homes anymore.
Brian Shields said…
So, if I observe this right, if the tax percentage is going up, they get more in fax funds, then if the valuation goes up, that percentage is worth more, they are receiving even more taxes.

So these taxes are being squandered, rates rising to recover, and the lesson of budgeting is never learned.

Therefore a society exists where seniors are forced into slavery to pay the government because they can't get their act together.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...