6/30/2004

The effects of Bush's $63 million cuts proposal on Cedar City

Even though I strongly approve of government cuts in spending, I appose this policy because it hurts small communities that need the subsidies the most. Cedar City would have to come up with two hundred thousand dollars in order to keep SkyWest in Cedar City. We have recently designed a new airport terminal for Cedar City and found funding for it. Cedar City is a growing community. If this proposal goes through, there are only two things we could do to keep the airport open, cut other city services or raise taxes. The city services we would have to cut into are our parks, street maintenance, and other city funded programs that beautify our city and make it a pleasant place to live. Our taxes are already very high, raising our taxes would only slow down our economy and keep people from moving to Cedar City because of the high taxes, which would only stunt our growth even more. In conclusion, I believe that the Bush administration shouldn’t just cut, cut, cut…they should look into what communities can handle the cuts and which ones can’t.

2 comments:

morty said...

seems like a loose loose situation. if he doesn't cut then taxes will increase. and if he does then people get mad. he needs to find a happy middle ground.

Dr. Tufte said...

Spelling mistakes both in the original post and the first comment.

Micah has some good points. I'd like the airport to get bigger and more beautiful here too.

On the other hand ... I don't fly to SLC or LV, and it is probably more economical, and certainly safer than driving. Too many people do the same thing.

I think the fact that air service in places like Cedar City has to be subsidized is pretty good evidence that the business is not viable here.

But the idea that Bush should consider his tax cuts more precisely bothers me a little. This doesn't mean I advocate the converse of not thinking about them at all. It's just that the experience around the world and across time with governments picking winners and losers is not good. Those sort of choices always get perverted, usually through mechanisms described by public choice.