Economics- Wants and Needs

It’s hard to know what I should write about now that I finally have a chance to put some thoughts down in this blog.
One of the most pressing issues on my mind these days is the economic policy of our local, state and national governments.
I was substituting in a social studies class the other day where the students were learning about wants and needs. The book made the point that we must differentiate wants from needs because the needs should be taken care of before the wants. I would like to have our legislators take that class. I would like to ask them how their recent economic decisions are working for the people in our country. Here are some examples:

They have reduced taxes for the wealthiest and most able among us while increasing regressive taxes that target those who need most of their income to provide for basic needs. What are the basic needs of our people that should be taken care of? On my list of needs are food, affordable and decent housing, health care, safety, and education for our children. What have our local, state, and national governments been talking about these days?

On the federal level, Congress passed a law making it harder for people to go bankrupt when interest gouging credit card companies have them so far in debt that they cannot provide for their basic needs. In many cases, they have already paid the principle on these debts several times before declaring bankruptcy. The law did nothing to protect consumers from the credit card traps that got them into such financial difficulty in the first place. Those who fall into these traps are among the most vulnerable among us, the uneducated, the young, the low income worker just managing from pay check to pay check, those who sincerely want to pay their debts, but have health or unemployment problems. While I believe that people should pay their debts, I also believe our government has an obligation to protect its people from corporate pirates.

The city of Cleveland has been talking about “revitalizing the downtown area”, translation: “tax payer money given to private enterprise to put more big retail establishments downtown and tax abatement to encourage them.”
We have already done that in the past. Cleveland taxpayers helped the Cleveland Indians and Browns purchase new facilities with millions of our hard earned dollars. What did we get for it? We have losing teams and tickets that are more expensive and difficult for the average family to purchase. The Luxury Suites are nicer and the owners are getting richer. I concede; there might also have been a few more low paying jobs created, but it hasn’t stopped the good jobs from leaving town. While police, fire and school employees are laid off, the city government is talking about putting gambling casinos downtown. Do we really need more retail establishments in the greater Cleveland area? How will we be able to afford the police and fire protection they will need when we cannot afford to protect our citizens now? Do we need more gambling casinos in the world? Who is most likely to lose their money in the casinos and pay the taxes we will place on them, the wealthy or the poor to middle classes? There seems to be a prevailing attitude in our government that the people who fall into pitfalls such as excessive credit card debt, cigarette or alcohol addiction, and excessive gambling deserve to suffer whatever negative consequences they get because they are weak, ignorant or stupid or lack moral integrity. Governments have no moral scruples in profiting from these vices by encouraging their expansion in our society and by increasing the taxes on them. These taxes are regressive. The wealthy, even if they partake of these vices are not spending a large proportion of their income them. The poor who are addicted are. Government’s responsibility should be to protect the most vulnerable of its citizens, in many cases it is the children of the poor who suffer the most.

The state of Ohio has been busy too. The majority Republican legislature seems to find it easy to get agreement on economic issues, ONN April 19, 2005 reports,
“So far, so good for the budget process in the Ohio Legislature. Experts say the 51 billion-dollar spending plan's journey through the Ohio House is an indication that the process is much more collegial than two years ago. “
What does this economic plan provide?- Tax cuts for business, cut in sales tax (to promote more retail spending?), personal property tax, and income tax. How will we fund these tax cut? – By increasing the tax on alcohol and cigarettes and a consumption tax on energy, and cutting funding to education, local governments, libraries, and health care for the poor.

Yes, our legislators need a lesson in economics. We must fund needs before wants. Subsidizing the greed of the wealthy by shorting needs of the masses is not just and it is not good economics.