For those of you who don't pay attention to the news (i.e. for all of you including me), on Friday the Senate passed a 10-year, $792 billion tax cut, the largest in history. Republican leaders say the cut is justified, in light of a projected budget surplus of $3 trillion over the coming decade. President Clinton, meanwhile, has promised a veto, saying the cut is too steep and threatens domestic program and budget reduction priorities.
I personally could care less. Nothing bothers me more than to see my copy of The Dartmouth cluttered with stories about budget this and Kosovo that and impeachment the other.
Like I have that kind of time! I want the local issues, the hard-hitting news for which The D is justifiably hailed, such as "SA May Increase Condom Availability." (Actual article from Friday's D. Hope you didn't miss it!)
Therefore, in order to keep the level of actual news in your trusty D to an absolute minimum, I propose the following solution to the tax cut debate: give the money to me.
Bear with me for a minute to consider the alternatives. I mean, if the government were to let taxpayers keep that money, they would fritter it away on silly things like food, clothing, shelter, and education. If the government kept the money, on the other hand, it would just spend it to fix highways and make sure the elderly receive health care. Clearly neither alternative is acceptable, so a viable third option is needed. It would be a tough job but I would be willing to step in and spend that $792 billion.
First of all, the proposed tax cut is $792 billion over a 10-year period. I am not sure whether or not the government operates like state lottery commissions, but at any rate, I choose the "lump sum" option -- probably $500 billion-ish, I would assume.
I would like that money to be deposited in my Fleet student checking account. I bet if I had $500 billion instead of, like, $34.82, that teller who always ends up cashing my checks would be nicer to me. You'd think there was no one else in the known universe who also can never remember his account number.
At that point my checkbook and I would go shopping. My checks feature different scenes involving Yogi, Boo-boo and the park ranger. This may be why people always seem reluctant to accept my checks. Yogi and Boo-boo are backed in full faith by that $34.82 in the bank, people!
What would I spend the money on? Well, some of those things that the federal government buys, that no citizen would ever even consider wanting to own, must have some importance. Like the federal subsidy for honey and mohair. I don't even know what mohair is, or why it is always connected to honey. But just consider the implications if no one were to buy it. All those mohair trees or bushes or whatever would just sit covered with unwanted mohair.
So I figure I'd have a pretty good pile of that stuff sitting in the corner of my room, next to the laundry basket. The rest of the money I think I would use to buy a small backwards nation, such as Canada. This nation I would join to the United States by dividing it into a bunch of new states, all of which would be named "Rob." I mean, it's been a long time since the U.S. has gotten any new states.
We seem to have lost that "can-do" kind of attitude that caused us to so blatantly disregard the rights of Native Americans and Mexico. Time for more Manifest Destiny is what I'm saying.
So that's where the money would go. Mohair and "Rob." I didn't say it's a particularly good plan, but it will certainly sidestep the upcoming budget debate within the federal government. More importantly, it will make sure there is plenty of space left over in The D for what really matters: "SA May Increase Condom Availability."
