THE VISION 2025 TAX PROPOSAL

The following is a list of articles written by Libertarians on the Vision 2025 Tax Proposal.

Michael Clem
Albro Daniel
Jimmy Cook: Short-Sighted Vision and Whose money is it anyway?
John Galt: Truth in Taxation and a response to "A river runs through it"
Roger Bloxham
Lynn Atherton
Bob Paine

Links to other information on Vision 2025

TulsaRegion.com
Tulsa Beacon
Tulsa Today
TulsaCounty.org

VISION 2025 Article by Michael Clem

The Vote No people on the Vision 2025 project have it wrong. They say that it's not the right time for a project like this. The problem is that it's never the right time for a project like this.

A government, even a local government, has only one legitimate function: to protect the rights of its citizens. Vision 2025 has little to do with protecting rights and much to do with interfering in the local economy. Economic development, however well-intended, is not part of the government's job. However, in promoting economic development, the city and county governments must necessarily violate some people's rights.

Proponents of the project want us to invest in Tulsa, and say that it will improve our economy. They cannot guarantee that the project will be profitable, however, because they cannot guarantee that the money spent will actually do anything to help the economy. They want the taxpayers to become venture capitalists, and to take all the risks that go along with it.

The incentives for American Airlines and Boeing are especially risky, just because the airline industry is a highly-regulated, high-risk industry. The money we give them will have little or no effect on the economy of their industry. If the airlines continue to have bad economic times, Tulsa may have little or nothing to show for the money we spend. Tulsa should be diversifying its economy, not gambling on the airline industry.

We should be especially concerned with the American and Boeing incentives, because this is blatant corporate welfare. Wouldn't we be better off by supporting and growing small, local businesses, instead of giving more advantages to large corporations? Supporting small businesses would allow us to "balance our portfolio", increasing Tulsa's diversification, and not to put all of our eggs in one basket.

Furthermore, there is the question of where the money is coming from. Every penny that goes to the Vision projects will be money that is not spent elsewhere in our economy, money that we are already spending right now. What will you and I have to give up to pay for this new tax? More importantly, how will it affect the local businesses when we are no longer spending this money on them? It's fairly easy to see what the new tax money will be spent on, but it's more difficult to see the results of the money that will no longer be spent.

We do ourselves a disservice if we do not consider the larger consequences of the economic shift caused by this tax increase. It's not just a penny, but one percent--a penny out of every dollar we spend, a dime for every ten dollars, a dollar for every hundred dollars. And that's on top of the nearly eight pennies per dollar that we're already being taxed.

Businesses that are currently struggling in these difficult economic times will be even worse off if they are not recipients of the tax money. For some, this tax may be the straw that break's the camel's back. It's difficult to see how we can tax our way to prosperity. Do we trust our city and county officials to spend our money better than we can ourselves? Does the mayor or county commissioners know better than you what you need?

As for the convention center/sports arena, there are very few convention centers or sports arenas in the country that are turning a profit. Tulsa's own convention center continues to lose money every year. No doubt, improvements will make it a nicer facility, but the real problem is the management of the facility. No amount of tax money will improve the management. The best thing we could do with the convention center is to sell it to a private entity who will then have strong incentives to make it profitable.

Ultimately, Vision 2025 is a huge project with too little accountability and too many risks. It's not an investment--it's a gamble. We shouldn't be gambling with taxpayers' money.

So what's the alternative? What can we do instead of voting for a boondogle like Vision 2025? Too often, we are given the false dichotomy of either letting government control development or have no development at all. The only real solution is to let businesses and entrepreneurs do their job, and get government out of the way. Private investors are always seeking profitable business ventures and opportunities, and because they face the risk of losing their own money, they are less willing to invest unless they are reasonably sure that a venture will actually be economically worthwhile.

Government politicians and bureaucrats, on the other hand, are much more likely to be influenced by political concerns, not economic feasibility. Governments tend to create laws that restrict economic development, like zoning laws and licensing, making it more difficult for businesses to start up or expand. "Public-Private partnerships" are usually cases where government has some control over the development, and thus are willing to make exceptions to the law and facilitate the regulatory maze that businesses otherwise have to deal with.

The best thing that government can do to encourage growth is to remove all unnecessary laws and restrictions to starting or expanding businesses. Instead of providing political favors to particular companies or industries, we should create an economic enterprise zone that will encourage anyone who thinks Tulsa would be worth investing in to start and expand a business.

The rest is up to Tulsans. We will not get an improved economy by voting for it. Economic reality tends to ignore the political will. Instead, we will get what we want by spending our money on the things we really want. If we're willing to pay for it, there are businessmen who will be willing to provide what we want, be it a sports arena, a vibrant night life, an orchestra, or whatever.

If we're not willing to pay for it, then what right do we have to try to force others to pay for it?

Michael A. Clem, Tulsa

Reasons to Say NO, Again, to Vision 2025

On September 9, Tulsa County voters have an important and difficult decision to make. Citizens are told by various organizations that support of Vision 2025 is good for Tulsa. But is it really good for Tulsa or for a few select individuals and organizations?

The first two propositions propose corporate welfare to help create jobs in Tulsa. But receiving money that does not come from effective management and earned profits is wrong. Boeing recently lost $1 billion in future rocket business from the federal government as punishment because they were stealing secrets from a rival company. American Airlines wants our money to remain competitive. Artificially propping up a company through corporate welfare is not good for the economy.

It might appear beneficial in the short-term but long-term it might prevent important innovation and change in the industry. Discount carriers are not losing money and increasing their business share. Maybe American needs to change it’s business plan, not receive unearned money from Tulsans.

The second proposition involves funding for educational, health care and event facilities. If the various universities feel they need new accommodations then they should fund raise for these projects like every other private and public university. If they can convince enough people to voluntarily give money to their cause then, and only then, should it be built.

Money for improvements to the convention center is also wrong. There’s already a brand-new convention center built from private voluntary funds. It didn’t have to steal money from the taxpayer and neither should any other facility just because its downtown.

The fourth proposition wants money for capital improvements. They want new community centers in various cities. However, there already are community centers. They’re called restaurants, movie theaters, service clubhouses, etc. that were built by voluntary private funds, not money added on top of your grocery bill. Other tax money will go toward expanding “community enrichment” centers. But shouldn’t these be allowed to develop naturally? Money for expansion will come if people want to visit these centers and through effective management of income.

The bottom line is that taxes should never be used to enhance the economy. Unintended consequences usually occur and ordinary citizens are left cleaning up the mess. If a community is ready for capital improvements they will occur naturally through the private sector and flourish or die based on their merits.

Please vote no on September 9 and show that Tulsans want true growth and accountability.

Albro Daniel
Owasso, OK

Short-Sighted Vision

The Democrats and Republicans still haven’t announced whether they are “officially” for or against Vision 2025. It is an idea championed by a Republican Mayor and a Democratic Governor. The team assembled to put the Vision Plan together is a bi-partisan group. The Libertarians want to know why the Democrats and Republicans won’t officially endorse passing or rejecting the plan. The Libertarians are against the idea and they know how they feel about the idea, it is just more government growth. We are dealing with extortion, socialism, and slavery.

We are being extorted by Boeing & American Airlines, just so they will continue to do business in Tulsa. The money to pay the extortion is going to be taken involuntarily from everyone, regardless of whether you work at either facility or not. Socialism is the concept of taking wages from someone who earns to give to someone who doesn't. Taxation in general is the modern version of slavery. The founding fathers tarred & feathered tax collectors over a 2% tax. Americans now put up with as much as a 48% tax burden. Do we really need one more percent added?

Because of their belief that government can answer society’s problems, the Democrats would like to see it pass. Why have they been dragging their feet in making an official endorsement? Even though the Republicans talk about limited government and lower taxes, they do little to stop the growth of government or to decrease its cost. Many of them would like to see it pass. Why won’t they take a stand on the issue? The Libertarian Party is the only party that has a consistent value on this issue. They believe it is wrong for government to force someone to turn over the fruits of their labor so that someone else can decide how to spend it.

Neither Democrats, nor Republicans ever stop to think about the hard work, the sweat; or all the years people spend working to provide for their families. Most politicians act as though tax money they advocate spending belongs to them. Those that do realize whose money they are spending hope that their constituents don’t remember. The Libertarians want this to be a black and white issue, it is wrong for one person to decide the fate of another. Government takes money from a group who works to feed their children and decides who is deserving of it.

The opposition to the plan seems to be concerned mainly with whether this is the right time or not. There is never a right time for the unchecked growth of government. The fact that many of the programs in the Vision plan should tell Tulsans that this isn’t really an economic stimulus plan as much as it a wish list for certain groups of people.

Downtown Tulsa has seen a resurgence of activity as of late. There are clubs and restaurants going up in the area, without an extra penny sales tax. The reason these businesses are willing to open up in the downtown area is that they see the potential for profit. The greatest incentive for opening up a business is profit. Socialists think profiting from business risk is immoral. That is why they are looking to government solutions. The problem with government solutions is that there isn’t as much incentive to make a profit. In fact, agencies that make a profit are penalized at the next budgetary session with decreases in their budget allowances. Since government agencies don’t see where the money comes from, they rarely worry if they are wasting it or not. They think of the money as not belonging to anyone at all, so there is no incentive to spend wisely. They can only get behind programs that waste money indiscriminately.

The Democrats and Republicans will not officially release a statement about this plan, although they both support it. Libertarians know that this is an idea based upon the growth of government. Libertarians can not support such a plan, and Democrats and Republicans refuse to openly support it.

The budgetary problems in Oklahoma and the rest of the country are a failure of big government. But the Democrats and the Republicans want to continue to let the government grow. Shouldn’t we be debating about how to make the government smaller, and cheaper, instead of trying to finance its growth?

Jimmy Cook
Oklahoma Libertarian Party

Whose money is it anyway?

How can we convince American Airlines to keep the maintenance facility in Tulsa ? How can Tulsa get the new factory Boeing wants to build? A typical government solution would be to pay them. They are asking you to raise your own taxes to pay both of them. The problem with AA and Boeing receiving tax money is that the money is taken from everyone and used for the benefit of a few who get jobs at the tax-subsidized facility.

The Vision group wants to subsidize Boeing and AA to acquire jobs for a few of the citizens of Tulsa . It can only lead to more stagnation of our economy, and more inefficiency of the companies proposed for the subsidies. Fair competition stimulates businesses to compete for consumer dollars, thus stimulating them to become more efficient in order to make a profit. Subsidizing any business with public money creates inefficiency and is unfair to the community because tax money is being used. The tax money they propose spending is yours and mine, the only portion of it that belongs to the Vision 2025 planners is the tax money they have paid as individuals. As a fellow Libertarian friend of mine said, “they want to gamble with Tulsa ’s future using someone else’s money.”

Tulsa has the second highest unemployment of any city in the nation right now. We have lost 17,000 high-paying jobs in the last year. Boeing has lost 40,000 high-paying jobs in the last month alone. Is Boeing stable enough for us to invest money in? American Airlines is reportedly losing about $1 million per day. Will the $22.3 million they propose to give AA help them much? At one million a day, the money will run out in 22 days. Where will they be 22 days after getting the money?

Tulsa once had all its eggs in the basket of the oil industry, now they want to move their eggs to the aerospace basket. Maybe they didn’t learn the lesson their predecessors learned. Government is too inflexible to manage an economy, even a local one such as Tulsa . It’s better to let companies decide they want to invest money in a city because they think they can make a profit. If the company can’t make a profit, they are forced to improve the way they do business. Subsidies only reward companies for failing to improve.

Jimmy Cook
Oklahoma Libertarian Party

Truth in Taxation

This is not a 1% sales tax increase!

Depending upon which City in Tulsa County you make purchases in, this is a 10.5% or 12.5% tax hike! Don't let them get away with the 1 penny stuff and 1% claim.

MATH:

8 cents on the dollar to 9 cents is a 12.5% increase

9.5 cents on the dollar to 10.5 cents is a 10.5% increase

Response to "A river runs through it"

In response to the Tulsa World article on Sunday, August 24thm by Julie DelCour with the rather original title of "A river runs through it"

Dear Mrs. Delcour,

If developing the river is really a good economic idea then why are not profit seeking venture capitalists already exploiting it? If Vision 2025 Proposition 4 is about lofty social ideals then why are not the good people of Tulsa freely donating their time and their money to have improvements made rather than waiting to be forced by taxation? Giving blood for example is noble so people do it with out waiting on government forcing them to.

The very fact that venture capitalists are not investing in the river is because it is not worth doing.

Should these propositions pass then on what moral grounds do the Vision 2025 advocates justify forcibly taking money from people in order to build things they may not want and may not use? I have a lot of bad business ideas that no one will invest in so how do I get on the ballot to force other people pay for it?

Vision 2025 has not been a Republican vs Democrat issue but it does demonstrate that only the Libertarian Party does not believe in the initiation of force (compulsory taxation) to achieve social and political goals. Everyone wants to make Tulsa better. The best way to improve Tulsa and protect liberty is to remove government strangle holds on free enterprise, forget about bureaucratic master planning and just let the invisible hand of economics and American self-determinism do its thing.

"Vision" 2025: Vote Yes or No?

The Question should be, " Why would anyone vote 'Yes'?"

There is a very old saying that politicians love to, "View with alarm" and "Point with pride." It's an art!

Gigantic tax proposals, which increasingly a large number of cities are promoting, certainly fall into this category. If one tracks the pattern, the proposals are invariably preceded by a year or so of hand wringing and wails of despair, followed by the usual expensive recommendations, put together by a committee of stellar citizens.

The promotions are rarely for maintenance and infrastructure. Here they have failed. These existing infrastructures are considered boring and the assumption is made that with an ever-improving tax inflow, the money will "somehow" be there for these items for which they have assumed responsibility.

The millions these scoundrels claim will materialize are from the taxes they hope to collect on the dollars spent outside of their money losing monuments. The astute politician can usually sidestep and avoid the responsibility for the losses, graft, mismanagement and expensive upkeep when their bad programs lead to the need for further tax dollars.

We, in Tulsa County, are being treated to an exhibit, a demonstration, of the political art of, "viewing with alarm and pointing with pride." If 2025 passes, the pointing with pride will be a real challenge for our politicians. Vote "No" on 2025 and steal their thunder.

Three strikes and they are out! Now there is something at which we can point with real deserved pride.

Roger Bloxham

The Seen and the Unseen. Your Own Vision, Your Way!

Many years ago, a very astute writer identified an extremely important precept that is still applicable. Frederic Bastiat, a Frenchman, (1801-1850) went against the then prevailing trend. He explained many economic actions have immediate "seen" results, but it is important to be aware that they may have later "unseen" consequences.

An excellent example of this phenomenon was later expounded upon by the American economic writer, Henry Hazlitt. He applied it to government attempts to plan economic decisions. Governments often propose to collect tax money and spend it on projects that they have chosen as "important." When these tax funded projects are completed, they are then "seen" easily by everyone. The politicians have done something clearly visible.

It does not matter to them, at the moment of success for their particular vision, that historically, government schemes are foolish and unprofitable and have ultimate undesirable consequences. The reason for this is quite simple: the incentives do not exist for profitability, the signals of profit and loss, which are guidelines for private business, are missing, the need to please customers is absent and there are no actual investors to whom they are accountable. The "well" of tax money rarely runs dry, unlike a privately funded enterprise.

Important to politicians is that all can see their magnificent creations. People are told, falsely, that had the tax money never been collected and the governmental authority not pushed for the project to be undertaken, that nothing of value would have been accomplished.

What is the truth? What is invisible and "not seen" is the multitude of things that are not accomplished. With each penny of tax money collected by force, a decision to spend, invest or save is not made. The new hire, the added goods bought, the money saved for something each person had decided was important to them, their own individual vision of the future, does not take place. Every day in every village or city, thousands, even millions, of voluntary economic decision take place but because they are so diffused they are practically invisible. That does not mean, however, that they are not important and even better than the one large decision made by government. Quite the contrary! Most people give the use of their money careful thought and if it is the wrong decision, the person who makes it is the one that is responsible for his own bad judgment, not all the taxpayers.

It is the many, almost invisible, voluntary economic decisions that people make that form a solid foundation for economic growth and prosperity. We now have years of economic history and have added more since Bastiat lived, that can compare the top- down government planned economy to the voluntary bottom-up economy. It should be obvious, the involuntary system, has failed miserably. Recent experience should remind us that worse than the deprivation that those societies suffered were the totalitarian aspects that came to permeate the culture far beyond just the economic decisions dictated by the planners.

Where greater economic freedom prevails the benefits are enormous for all, contrary to what the planner/politicians would have us believe.

Please remember this the next time you are asked to vote for a tax to support the politicians schemes. Yes there may be a large building for all to see, but there will also be countless unseen things that did not happen as a result of that money not being available for each to spend as they choose, on their own private vision for their own life.

Lynn Atherton

Aquarium angle on Vision 20-25 Myopia

The Jenks aquarium wants a $12MM share in the Vision 20-25 $885MM myopia spend-and-tax Utopia.

Some questions:

The newly opened aquarium is boasting of its impressive attendance. The true measure of a successful tourist attraction is a year or so after it has opened.

By then, you've weeded out the impulsive curiosity seekers who will pay to see anything new. The problem is how to get repeat business. Bell's Amusement Park and the Big Splash waterpark shows you how they get repeat business by INDIVIDUALIZING the amusement experience.

Once the demand of first time visitors has gone through the turnstiles, who will be visiting the aquarium? Of course, the government controlled entities (public schools) can continue to make field trips to see the aquarium, but what will be the levelized repeat business from voluntary customers? I remember visiting the British Museum once during the workweek when the place was full of school children running around out of control. Definite detractor.

From what I've heard about the quality and quantity of the aquarium exhibits, I would think that attracting repeat business would be challenging to the operators. I remember seeing out at Oral Roberts University the diorama "Journey through the Bible". I went through it once. It was interesting, reasonably well done. and "free", although there was a recorded pitch by the Roberts' to plant some seed faith with a donation. But, I didn't go back. P.S. The Diorama is closed now.

Is the $12MM perhaps to pay for cost overruns on the Aquarium??

Bob Paine