It all comes down to perspective

Economist Henry Hazlitt frequently pointed out that when studying economics it is important to keep in mind the unseen as well as what is easily seen and perceived.  This is not always easy to do, but lawmakers and all those who opine on fiscal policy would do well to remember this lesson.

With that in mind, we turn to The News Tribune in Tacoma. Last week the newspaper made its opinion known on Tim Eyman, the 1% property tax cap, Governor Gregoire, the Democrats in the legislature, and sea creatures.

Regarding Initiative 747's 1% cap on the rate of growth in the amount of money a property-taxing jurisdiction can collect, the column says:  "At last tally, the initiative had pared local governments' tax collections by about $1.6 billion."

Note their use of language:  basically they're lamenting that the 1% cap took money from governments.  But we can use different wording to say the same thing.  Here's my version:  "At last tally, the initiative saved taxpayers about $1.6 billion."  I'm saying the same thing but from the perspective of people who have to pay the property taxes.  $1.6 billion is a lot of money---money that has been saved, invested, spent in the economy and therefore provided jobs, etc.  That's the unseen effect of slowing the rate of tax increases (that's right, taxes have still increased since Initiative 747 became law).

The News Tribune's language implies that the government has first dibs on my paycheck, and that I can keep only whatever is left over after they've taken their cut.  Like so many others, they fall into the trap of government-centric language.  In their eyes, the government lost money.  All the people who have had less money taken from them because of Initiative 747 see it differently.

UPDATE, 12/7/07:  The News Tribune published this post as a letter to the editor.