Paying your taxes is patriotic, or something. We pay taxes so the government can take care of us and provide the services we need. If there was no income tax, there would be no police, no firefighters, no teachers, no garbage collectors, etc., etc. This is generally the refrain from the political left. Never mind that there were police, firefighters, teachers, garbage collectors, and etc., etc., before income tax was introduced. But the latest California wildfires – a tragedy of devastating proportions – have demonstrated the biggest flaw in the left’s pro-taxation argument. It’s a flaw of which limited-government proponents have long been aware. The billion-dollar question is, will Democrats and progressives finally figure it out?
In particular, the libertarian mantra, “taxation is theft,” has for years been the target of scorn and ridicule from statists. If you don’t believe in paying taxes, they crow, then don’t call the fire department if your house is burning down. Not to make light of the suffering currently being endured in the Golden State, but run that silly rhetoric by the residents of Los Angeles County who lost everything to the wildfires and ask them their thoughts on the matter.
To put the debate in the simplest of terms – so simple that even Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass might understand, though probably not – take the case of Bob Simpson (no relation to any real living person).
Commerce for Dummies
Bob does a lot of driving and decided it would be prudent to pay every month for a roadside assistance and recovery service. One winter’s day, Bob is navigating a deserted mountain road when his car slides off the icy blacktop into a ditch. Bob calls for roadside assistance, only to be told no one is available to help him. Simpson asks, “Why not?” The customer care representative tells him the company simply doesn’t have the resources at the moment. Naturally, Bob wants to know how that’s possible. The representative politely explains that the company spent Bob’s membership dues on diversity training and on a trip to Africa for the CEO. He adds that no tow trucks are available anyway, because a lot of them have been sent to Kyiv to rescue Ukrainian cars. Not only that, but the business hasn’t been replenishing its fuel inventory, and what recovery vehicles they have are immobile.
Could anyone blame Bob for concluding that the company stole, or at least misappropriated, his money? Would Bob be justified in seeking some form of redress? Would a company that operated in such a manner even stay in business? The answers to these questions, obviously, are no, yes, and no, respectively.
Why should it be any different when dealing with government? Why should tax revenue be considered not bound by the same private-sector principle that consumers get the goods and services for which they pay – assuming one supports taxing private citizens at all?
The taxpayer-funded Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) failed – and continues to fail – the people of western North Carolina, displaced by Hurricane Helene. California’s taxpayer-funded Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) failed victims of the wildfires in Los Angeles County, despite the fact that residents of that county are among some of the most-taxed citizens in the United States.
As of Jan. 13, the CAL FIRE website recorded 40,588 acres of land burned, more than 12,300 structures destroyed, and 19 fatalities, pending coroner confirmation. Ironically, “CAL FIRE Serves and Safeguards the People and Protects the Property and Resources of California,” according to the agency’s homepage.
Kristian Fors, a research fellow at the Independent Institute, based in California, summed up the failure of Democrat-progressive attitude toward taxation during a Fox News interview: “I think the people of California – they’re willing to pay high taxes. They’re willing to support things that maybe they don’t necessarily agree with because there is a basic assumption that underlies it all, that our government is here to take care of us.” Fors, a Los Angeles County resident, added, “But now in a situation like this, when there’s total mismanagement, when people are scared, when there’s 0% containment, people are asking themselves a question, what did all those tax dollars go for?”
As of this writing, most of the fires are now more than 0% contained. That takes nothing away from Fors’ observations. Perhaps the first mistake Californians made was assuming that “our government is here to take care of us.” It’s impossible not to recall Ronald Reagan’s quip during a 1986 press conference, “I think you all know that I’ve always felt the nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.’”
Reagan also told union workers in 1981, “Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.” So, one could argue that even Reagan justifies paying taxes to fund national defense, law enforcement, and fire departments to protect the people – even though that’s not exactly what he said. But what about when the fire department, the law enforcement agencies, or even the military is unable to adequately protect the people because tax dollars have been redirected to things that have nothing to do with their protection? Is that not an act of fraud perpetrated on the taxpayers?
Wildfires Blame-Game, Wasted Benjamins
Apologists for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Mayor Bass, et al. can dream up all the excuses they want as the wildfires rage on, destroying the lives of those very people Fors says were willing to pay high taxes so that the government would take care of them. They can pretend climate change was the cause, or that it’s the oil companies’ fault, or that Donald Trump is somehow to blame – yes, all these laughable and entirely unfounded alternate realities have been vocalized. But in the final analysis, the taxpayers of California – and North Carolina – were stiffed by bureaucrats and elected officials, whose salaries are also paid out of tax revenues.
Janisse Quiñones, head of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), enjoys an annual salary of around $750,000. Obviously, Quiñones was aware that the 117-million-gallon Santa Ynez Reservoir was dry (some reports claim she ordered its draining while others say it was already empty when she was hired by Bass in May 2024). She also was reportedly aware of multiple non-functional fire hydrants around Los Angeles County. What was her focus, though? “It’s important to me that everything we do is with an equity lens and social justice and making sure that we right the wrongs that we’ve done in the past,” she said during an interview on radio station KBLA.
Coincidentally, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) is also a top priority for Los Angeles Fire Department Chief Kristin M. Crowley. Meanwhile, the mayor of Los Angeles has been furiously slashing the fire department’s budget by millions of dollars. It’s a safe bet, though, that the department’s DEI initiatives have not been reduced by a single cent.
So, while the citizens of Los Angeles County deserve a great deal of sympathy and support as they battle to survive the wildfires, put out the flames, and rebuild, they might do well to reassess. Those tax dollars are clearly not being invested in their protection and safety, so perhaps it’s time for some major changes.