The Utah Taxpayers Association’s opposition to the carbon tax is not based on the merits of, or need for, new policies for dealing with our environmental problems, but simply one more application of the “no tax of any kind is acceptable” philosophy: no increase in funds for schools or for dealing with or helping the mentally ill or providing health care for the most vulnerable or … anything … period.
The rhetoric they develop has one purpose, and that is no new taxes. In fact, they actually favor a decrease in all forms of taxation, period. No tax is a good tax. Compassion and the idea of using available resources to solve problems are beyond their comprehension. They often even refuse to acknowledge a problem exists, if solutions require public funds.
Quality of life for their members seems to be a function of how much personal wealth they can accumulate.
I appreciate that sometimes we have to pause and think about how best to use resources, but I'm also suggesting that at times we have to share the wealth. Can I ask why that troubles members of the Utah Taxpayers Association?
Bernie Hart, Salt Lake City