The Status Quo

The dictionary defines “status quo” as the existing state of affairs. Few would argue that our “existing state of affairs” is far from desirable and many cry for reform in many areas. Health care and taxation currently head up that list, but despite these cries in the past, little has really changed. Why could that be if so many of us want major league changes in these areas? Good question.

If you look at our history, you can see other examples of a changing landscape in many facets of our society: transportation, communication, and the like. So why did the stage coach and telegraph go by the wayside without much resistance, but similarly archaic principles in our tax code and health care system continue to survive? One good reason, I’d say, is that our stagecoach drivers and telegraph operators did not employ lobbyists to represent their personal interests in the halls of power. Without such representation, these folks were destined to find new careers in completely new arenas. “Well good,” you say. “That’s progress and change is good!” Unless, of course, you’re the unfortunate soul faced with finding that theoretical new career.

Our current tax system relies on hordes of accountants, advisors, attorneys and such dedicated to the proposition that we, the taxpayers, are in dire need of their services to avoid paying one extra cent of tax. They take money from us and pass that money on to their creditors and family to maintain a particular life style. Just like each of us does in our chosen field of endeavor. Well, now that cash flow is threatened if a major change in our tax laws should become reality.

Let’s say, for instance, that we abolish the federal income tax altogether and replace it with a national sales tax. Personally, I like this idea: it’s simple, straightforward, and taxes each of us equally (percentage-wise) on the things we buy. It does not penalize saving nor the associated interest and dividends and, best of all, leaves no taxpayer’s stone unturned. Drug dealers, hookers, mobsters, and other ne’er-do-wells like to spend their ill gotten gains just like us law abiding consumers. But now they’re paying their taxes just like the rest of us rather than avoiding that possibility. And the plumber you pay under the table, in cash, to get a better deal? Sorry, that’ll go away, too, because the plumber’s got to ante up when he buys his latest toy.  A “pay as you spend” tax code that guarantees full participation and a given percentage of our nation’s buying power. Wow, what a concept, right?

Except for the fact a large segment of our wage earners are now left looking for a new career field. And these folks have lobbyists, unlike their ancestors, and will fight, hammer-and-tong, against any such sweeping proposal. And to make matters worse, many in this field are attorneys and attorneys make up the majority of Congress, so is it any wonder that there is major resistance to a change of this magnitude?

Health care is not much different. Legions exist within HMO’s and insurance companies and they all share one attribute: earning a paycheck. If we end up with some sort of universal care, where do these folks get their next dollar? Rather than spend energy on finding alternatives, it seems as though they’re more willing to spend money on lobbyists and their ilk to sabotage any significant changes.

And just about every other industry has their army of supporters ready and willing to resist any change that might upset the status quo. Energy independence? Prison reform? Mileage standards? Financial ethics? You name it: any noticeable change in the way business is conducted begins at the bottom of the food chain (you and me), not at the top.

We are currently embroiled in an economic downturn of epic proportion and there seems to be no better time to challenge the status quo and slowly turn our economic juggernaut in a whole new direction. This will require differing levels of discomfort within segments of our society and there will be collateral damage as job descriptions disappear, but society, as a whole, will be better served by this change, I’d say. We’ve railed for years, if not decades, for a better approach to many of our nation’s thornier problems. C’mon, folks, isn’t it time to put our money where our mouth has been?