Individuals vs. The Common Good

Tax revenue last fiscal year in Colorado exceeded the somewhat arbitrary Tabor Amendment cutoffs by about $450 million. That means there will be refunds for many taxpayers in the coming year.

The average per joint return? $166.

Nobody is likely to refuse even that paltry sum, of course. Heck, I still make it a point to stoop down in a parking lot and pick up a nickel. Logic and basic math be damned.

Colorado remains stuck in a tight place between crumbling and inadequate highways, water systems, etc., and growing population, so there are still lots of unfunded needs.

I guess I could contribute my $166 to pave, what, an inch of highway? Or to make sure a light rail driver gets paid for working next Tuesday morning. But there's no mechanism to do that and even writing it down seems silly.

This refund illustrates one major reason for government. Individually, our small "donations" or simply tax dollars, can do little. But in aggregate... well, even $450 million isn't enough to cover our highway and bridge repair needs, but that chunk of change certainly could make a bigger dent than, I guess, nothing.

Yes, that $166 is/was my money. I paid it in taxes. I never really expected to get it back and it comes to an extra $13.80 per month... so no big deal.

I am trying not to be elitist here, and am sympathetic to arguments that even a small amount of unanticipated income could make a difference for a struggling family. But what if the entire $450 million were invested in making a difference reducing some specific problem? Like homeless housing or mental health support.

If you walk around downtown Denver, you can "fight homelessness" a few bucks at a time, dropping some money in a hat or cup. We've done that for many years, and that approach clearly does not work. 

I guess I could mail a check for my refund amount to some social net program but would that office even know what to do with my paltry donation? 

I sometimes wonder why we don't do more crowdfunding for things like repairing highways. Politicians seem to be able to tap into vast numbers of very small donations to come up with plenty of campaign cash.

All my wondering is in search of what is recently called "counterfactuals," or potential results of other choices. The word is not clear until we get some context, as it on the surface might be some version of "fake news." But I'm coming to embrace it.

After all, without well-supported counterfactuals, how can any progress be made? How can goals be established? No one likes the way the war in Afghanistan ended, but are there useful counterfactuals (options not chosen) that MIGHT have made things better?

Devising compelling counterfactuals is key to many arguments, particularly when some law or policy or activity is being criticizes. 

Persuasive writers need the capacity to wonder, "What if?"