Resource Mismatch as the Purveyor of Discontent

People on the right and left are quick to complain that they are being taken advantage of by other groups. The raucous cries of victimhood never cease, whether targeted towards the influx of illegal immigrants or the cabal of billionaires. The victimhood is primarily of resources. People are very quick to recognize when resources taken from them are used without their consent for others. Very few people would even have an ideological disagreement with their resources being used for others when they have some level of control. However, most citizens have no meaningful say in how their tax money is used. This lack of control is the cause of far more voter angst than politicians are willing to admit. The reality faced by most voters is that regardless of their vote they are unable to see any significant change in the near future. This broken feedback loop is extremely damaging to the formation of citizen’s economic and political beliefs. People are free to believe whatever they want when they can see no meaningful result of their votes. They can always feel that their money is being taken somewhere else and used for some purpose they neither know of nor approve of. A return of control to local government will allow for far better governance and a meaningful informational feedback loop that will allow people to be more satisfied in their own government.

The greater the distance between the utilization of resources and the people they are taken from, the more easy it will be for the people to be discontent. The Federal government taking in 60% of tax revenue is unacceptable, as there is almost no ability for civilian oversight to occur. While there are some things, such as defense, that benefit everyone, most Federal expenditures uniquely benefit a small subset of the population. The assumption that centralized control is better than local control has gradually brought more previously local responsibilities into the control of the Federal government. The problem faced by these agencies is that it is almost impossible for them to act in a way that benefits all localities. Each town has different needs and focuses, and all Federal actions will remove control or cause unforeseen damage. This reality creates one of the worst situations for both citizens and government: a problem that has no realistic possibility of being solved. When the Federal government has control of a certain area of life and creates a uniform policy that benefits most, there is no path forward for a group of citizens in the harmed minority. This creates the same strong feeling that first prompted the founders to revolt against taxation without representation. 

A lack of local control makes foolish ideologies flourish, as national power rewards extreme ideologies. The layers of nuance and individuality needed in local politics are lost in national politics. While even more nuance is needed in governance of a large nation, politicians are constantly pushed to be more extreme because the feeling that the Federal government is immovable justifies ever more radical ideologies to cause any sort of change. Local government forces people to deal with the consequences of their votes in a far more direct way. The responsiveness of local government and ability to focus on hyperspecific issues means that the success of a policy can be evaluated far more easily than otherwise. Of course, a radical majority can succeed in local politics just as it can nationally, but in local politics they will suffer for their foolishness rather than receive no feedback. Ideally no one would have to suffer from their poor decisions, but giving more control to local government would allow for learning faster with far less consequences. People could move between towns and have access to the same communities rather than be forced to suffer under poor national governance or move states. Different things work well with different cultures and communities, and local control will allow people to discover what works best rather than submit to monolithic Federal control.

Both information and ability to act are far greater at the local level, so funding should be transitioned from the Federal government to local government. While the overall level of taxation must decrease, it is telling that local taxes are so miniscule compared to almost all others. While much of local funding is derived from state and Federal sources, the incentives of local government make an increase in taxation far less likely. When people must live in the same community as those they tax, they will only raise taxes or go into debt when it is unavoidable. Everything from the administration of schools to law enforcement could be improved when more meaningful agency is given to those who understand the situation best. Ultimately, people dislike when their resources are taken from them and used for an unknown purpose far away from them.