Don't know whether this is a portent, but someone there is who really does not like the new adjusted gross income requirements and forms. Linda Wuebben in the Yankton SD paper feels the information required violates her privacy and in 2 days she's picked up 4 favorable comments. There's also a link to NAIS.
From a bureaucrat's standpoint, you can't implement a payment limitation without collecting data. As FSA learned in the late 1980's, changing the requirements and getting the forms right so that the burden is minimized is always a problem. Our problem then was applying the same process to everyone, which is the bureaucrat's golden rule, but the old 80/20 rule is more practicable and easy to take. People who correctly know they aren't affected by the limitation, who know they're innocent, get a lot more hostile than those who are. (That's a generalization with absolutely no evidence to support it at all.) If FSA could only read minds, they could give the potential cheats the full rigamarole and the honest folk a rubberstamp.
From a taxpayer's viewpoint, it's the old saying: he who pays the piper calls the tune.
2 comments:
The contradiction producers present is astonishing. Many have a strong dislike for gov't and taxes, yet feel deserving of the entitlement on a no questions asked basis. Is there honor among thieves?
Oh, now, that's too strong. :-) The greatest ability of humans is to ignore contradictions and see things as they ought to be. It's probably true that the Wuebbens aren't going to be limited by the AGI. May also be true she's never completed an application for aid for a college student, which I assume is about as intrusive.
Post a Comment