Simple? Yes, and … outrageous.

We pay our taxes, to buy our services. Simply.

The person we hire to provide those services – the president (who, as we know, runs the executive branch) – owes us those services. No “ifs,” “ands” or “buts.” Still simple.

If the president wants to add another “service” (like a wall), fine. But give us the choice! We elect our representatives, the Congress, to decide our wishes, and to set the price needed to purchase them. Still fairly simple. We are owed the services we are willing to buy, and for which we are now paying. Not complicated.

But all of a sudden to stop performing ongoing services while we pay their price – those taxes? Outrageous!

Would I pay $15 for a wall I will never see (and don’t want)? I very much doubt it, but I suppose, maybe. Certainly, though, I and all us purchasers deserve a separate choice, including the decision to put that $15 to a purpose we think would serve us better.

To get a bill while being denied what we bought and are still required to pay? That’s outrageous. We’ve lost services never to be performed, but we are told we must still pay for them as if we had received them, already for a month, and maybe much longer.

Justice requires sympathy and compensation for our servants put out of work by our president. He is our president. But for us, is this not thievery?

Now that’s outrageous – truly outrageous!

George B. Terrien


Only subscribers are eligible to post comments. Please subscribe or to participate in the conversation. Here’s why.

Use the form below to reset your password. When you've submitted your account email, we will send an email with a reset code.