Skip to main content

The Problem with the Sales Tax Holiday

   Many families spent last weekend doing their back-to-school shopping, not only because it was a nice weekend and school is coming up quickly, but also because it was the sales tax holiday.  This so-called holiday offered a reprieve from the state sales tax associated with purchasing most of the items we buy on a regular basis.  Many incorrectly thought that they could go buy things like TVs and other fun things, but the holiday was strictly limited to items associated with going back to school--clothes, school supplies, etc.  People jumped at the opportunity to buy things at a little bit of a discount, but few really thought through the implications of such an event.  Here are three:


  1. Taxation has been ingrained into our consciousness.  When we go to purchase items, we subconsciously add tax in our minds.  That means the government has us where they want us. Taxation of goods and services is something we now take for granted.  When I go to buy food, I'm surprised when the bill is lower than I thought because of the lack of sales tax.  Now, I know that food is not taxed (in Ohio anyway, unless you're going to eat it in a restaurant), but I always add tax in my mind because I'm used to adjusting mentally.  They have me right where they want me, which leads to #2.
  2. The government likes to act like they're giving us a treat.  It's a classic tactic--overly regulate and then act like you're being nice by giving back some of the freedom.  People begin to appreciate every scrap of freedom they receive from Uncle Sam's stingy fingers, never stopping for a moment to consider why he is the arbiter of those freedoms in the first place.  That leads us to #3.  
  3. The government is God. Our rights and our lives come from them.  That's how our country works now, anyhow.  Men worship.  It is inescapable.  Freedom can only be maintained in a culture that worships God and sees government as His servant.  When the Master is taken away, the servant will take His place.  The government is now the originator and the arbiter of our freedoms.  We pay property tax because we live on the government's land.  We pay sales tax because we trade in the government's marketplace. On and on it goes.

    The obvious question we have to ask is this: "Why should the government get money every time I buy or sell an item?"  Now, I'm not a "taxation is theft" sort of guy.  Taxation is an inevitable and Biblical part of a well-ordered society.  What I don't like is when taxation becomes associated with every aspect of our lives.  Your mom dies and leaves you a house.  Taxes.  You sell your car to your next-door neighbor.  Taxes.  You buy yourself a brand new car to replace the car that you just sold. Guess what?!  Taxes.  You go to Goodwill, for St. Peter's sake, and you pay tax on used items for which people already paid sales tax!  That, my friends, is absurd!

    No government--federal, state, or local--grants you your freedoms.  Our founding fathers, despite their faults, were absolutely correct in acknowledging that our Creator has bestowed our rights upon us.  We are all equal because we are creatures of God, made in His image.  That is the only valid argument for equality.  If we're living in an evolutionary cage match, the biggest dog has the right to do whatever he wants.  We aren't, however.  God has made us in His image, bestowed inalienable rights upon us, and established government for the express purpose of administering His justice on Earth.  Our government does not give us our rights.  They're supposed to protect them.

    So next time you go up to the counter and buy a pair of socks, consider why you're paying sales tax.  Is there anything you can do about it?  No, not really, but at least you'll be aware of the injustice. Trust me, it doesn't really help.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...