Poll: Americans Don't Think All This Government Is Worth What We Pay for It
The situation is more dire when you consider how much federal spending is financed by debt.

There were many reasons I left New York a quarter of a century ago, and taxes were just one among them. But along with less-restrictive laws and improved scenery, my move to Arizona rewarded me with substantially less banditry by state and local authorities. Still, I'd like an even lower tax bill, and so would most people. With Tax Day fast approaching, Americans consistently say they pay too much for government that isn't worth the money.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
Too Big a Take
"About two-thirds of people consider their federal income tax (67%), state sales tax (62%), and local property tax (69%) to be too high," the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research reported in January.
My old neighbors in the Empire State have the most to complain about, with state and local taxes devouring an average of 15.9 percent of income in addition to what they pay the federal government, according to the Tax Foundation. By comparison, in Arizona where I now live, residents pay an average of 9.5 percent of income to the state and localities. Alaskans fork over the least at 4.6 percent in addition to the federal share.
The government's reach into our pockets can add up quickly. At the federal level, according to the latest data, the average income tax rate in 2021 was 14.9 percent, up from 13.6 percent in 2020, and 13.29 percent in 2019. Add that to the state and local take and that's a big chunk of money out of the family budget. That said, average rates cover wide disparities in the amounts for which people are mugged by tax collectors.
"The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a 25.9 percent average rate, nearly eight times higher than the 3.3 percent average rate paid by the bottom half of taxpayers," according to the Tax Foundation, with reference to the federal income tax.
Why do Americans resent the tax burden? Well, there's the fact that taxes are compulsory payments in amounts over which they have little say. That's a big deal bound to breed resentment. Adding insult to injury is that many people are not happy about what they get in return for those forced expenditures.
"About a third of adults say they are receiving poor value from the taxes they pay, while less than a quarter believe they receive good value from paying these taxes," adds AP-NORC. "Most people lack confidence in the way taxes are spent by the federal government (66%) or state governments (58%). People are more likely to express at least some confidence in local governments (49%) or local school districts (53%) to spend their tax dollars wisely."
Last year, Gallup found similar results, with 60 percent of those surveyed saying federal income taxes are too high—"a level last seen in 2001." Thirty-four percent of adults called federal income tax the least fair tax, followed by local property tax at 29 percent, with state income tax, state sales tax, and Social Security tax named by between 10 and 14 percent of respondents.
Partisan Divide on Taxes
As with all things American in 2024, there is a partisan component to opinions about taxes.
"Democrats are more likely than Republicans to see taxes as fair, and Republicans are more likely to say their taxes are too high," notes AP-NORC.
"Republicans (71%) are now sharply more likely to believe their taxes are too high," agreed Gallup, as compared to 41 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of independents.
Much of this difference of opinion is undoubtedly the natural ideological contrast between parties that traditionally differ over the role of government, as AP-NORC points out.
"Democrats generally trust the government to spend tax money for the benefit of people like them and are open to higher taxes for more services. In contrast, Republicans are more skeptical of government spending, expressing a preference for lower taxes with fewer services."
But Gallup notes that only 46 percent of Republicans said the federal income tax was too high in 2020 when Donald Trump was president, compared to the 71 percent under Joe Biden. That may indicate higher tolerance for being milked by their side than by the opposition (the belief that federal income tax is too high increased one point among Democrats over that time, and 14 points among independents).
Of course, not all government activities are the same. Money spent on fighter jets isn't interchangeable with subsidies for green industries. It's not surprising that people more sharply resent being forced to pay for programs and policies they oppose than those they favor. When people say they get "poor value" for their taxes, they may mean not just inefficiency and bureaucracy, but things they consider wrong.
Borrowing To Deliver Poor Value
Worse, we actually get far more federal government than we're paying for. That's because so much federal spending is financed by deficits and debt—borrowing—that will have to be paid at some point in the future by taxpayers who are unlikely to be happy about the burden of paying overdue bills.
"The United States borrowed $1.1 trillion in the first six months of fiscal year 2024, including $236 billion in March," the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget warned this week.
Total national debt is over $34 trillion, with debt held by the public (excluding money the government owes itself) more than $27 trillion. The second figure—the more worrisome of the two—is close to 100 percent of GDP. The Congressional Budget Office sees debt held by the public continuously rising in years to come resulting in "significant risks to the fiscal and economic outlook."
It costs a lot to deliver government of "poor value." You have to wonder if people might be happier to keep their money so they can purchase services of their own choosing instead of coughing it up to be spent by officials in whom they "lack confidence." If taxpayers lack faith in those who forcibly extract their hard-earned cash and still can't balance the books, it makes sense to try something different.
There's an example to be found in how much more satisfaction I find in Arizona, where my state and local tax take is roughly two-thirds of what my old neighbors pay in New York. I don't miss any of the services my former home state provides—to the contrary, I opposed many of the policies my money paid for and the laws it was used to enforce.
I still think my taxes are too high and resent some of the uses to which it's put. The polling suggests I'm in good company in believing government takes too much and isn't worth the expense.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Since Democrats are good with higher taxes, let them pay higher taxes. It'd be interesting to see how many list themselves as "Democrat" on their tax forms.
The [D] party could've just started their Commie-Club centuries ago. The very point of having Gov-Guns in the equation was to RIP-OFF everyone else.
It would be an interesting to have a tax form that allowed people to direct their tax money to government projects they support. I very much like to see how that exercise would turn out.
Or you could just go hand your money over to the projects you support. The only feasible excuse to have the 'Guns' there is to STEAL something against someone own-will.
But isn't that what we already do? We elect representatives that select the projects that get our tax dollars.
Yes. The USA is already mostly conquered by [WE] [Na]tional So[zi]alist[s] gangsters.
And it will collapse if it keeps going just like all the other socialist experiments because ‘Gun’ theft is a zero-sum resources game.
Mostly we elect representatives who allocate big piles of money that unelected bureaucrats and appointees later decide how to spend.
You mean a system where people could choose the charities of their choice? Maybe lower taxes and let people. Amazing how you leftists never think of this.
There are plenty of charities out there and I get letters and emails every day telling me of the dire need for money to do their charitable work. If those charities cannot handle the need today, how would they be able to replace government services.
BTW - many charities rely on government funding in the form of grants to do their work. The money donated to them is only part of the funds needed. In many case donations provide matching funds for government grants. So, charities cannot replace government services.
Summary; Nothing pays better than 'armed-theft'.
Most charities are fucking rackets set up to create cozy jobs for well connected people.
And nothing says that better than a [Na]tional So[zi]alist government.
They also make fantastic vehicles to store wealth and dodge taxes at the same time for our new class of elites.
On this one, you have cause and effect reversed, Moderation. The historical evidence shows that government spending displaced charitable donations. Charities always want more money and many did originally seek government funds to increase their work but the evidence shows that it largely backfired and they get less now than they did before the government "largesse".
One of my schemes is to let Congress pass whatever budget they want, and establish your tax bill as now. The difference comes when you send in that tax payment: there's a list of every department headed by anyone Congress has to approve, and you allocate your dollars as you wish, as long as the total sent in matches your tax owed.
But the Congressional budgets are a maximum, so any department getting more has to return the excess to the citizenry. Any department getting less than its Congressional budget is just out of luck and has to survive on what people actually pay.
As to how that excess is returned, I don't care if it's equal amounts to every taxpayer, if it's to every voter, if it's by lotto. As long as the government doesn't get it, fine with me.
That was a side-arc in a science fiction story I read many years ago. In the story, it was an extension of the 'allocate $1 to the Presidential Election Fund' which if I remember correctly was relatively new at the time. The tax-day process was: step one - calculate your taxes owed; step two - allocate to your personal priorities.
I've often thought since that it would be a better system than we use now. Trust the 'wisdom of crowds' over centralized planning. But even in the fictional story, you only got to allocate most of your tax bill. Some funds were still reserved for the legislature to allocate.
I do wish I could remember which story it was.
Fuck you. Cut spending.
What do you mean 'armed-theft' of the Gov-Gun Criminals wasn't worth it??? It's what you collectively [WE] voted for. I was there. It went like this.
"Please, please, please STEAL my money and help the 'poor'".
It's always been that stupid. If you wanted to give your money to the 'poor' just go do it.
Now add-on the 'missing value' of $ to that tax-%.
That's right. There's a reason there are so many 'poor' people because the net-value doesn't grow on trees no matter how much Uncle Sam prints paper and takes fraudulent loans in your name.
But the ?free? pony-rides does add massive encouragement not to make any value at-all while simultaneously punishing value-providers. An exacto equation for how to make the 'poorest' society. 'Guns' don't make sh*t. 'Armed-theft' is a net-negative.
The American people don't think government is worth what they are paying even when they are getting services at bargain prices financed by deficit spending. What Congress needs to do is raise taxes so people know what services actually cost. Then people can really evaluate the cost of the service and they might look favorably on cutting some of the spending.
Yeah; We all see how much of a 'bargain' government ran enterprise is. From Healthcare, Education and Housing holy cow all that crazy ?affordable? sh*t is just about enough to bankrupt everyone.
UR F'En retarded.
Oh wait. My bad. You must have the perspective of Fafsa grants, Subsidized housing, Subsidized utilities, Medicaid, Socialist Checks and welfare while you spend all day playing social justice warrior on your subsidized computer all day.
Yeah; I guess that makes sense. STEALING makes everything ?affordable? ……………… for YOU.
Never-mind all those slaves you 'own'. Keep the slavery party alive! /s
Well then take a minute to think about what all those services would cost if government taxed at a rate to cover all the expenses without deficit spending.
No need to ‘think’ beyond blatant reality.
There was a time BEFORE all this socialist crap came about. When a *real* USA existed. When doctors would come to your house for the price of a pizza. When shelter was a couple years of labors worth. When education was paid for in cash. When ‘armed-theft’ wasn’t so massive and Liberty and Justice was ensured.
Or just consider your local dentistry which is only partially socialized versus healthcare. They still do come to your door for the price of about two pizzas.
I'd settle for a statute moving Tax Day to the day before the election.
It was interesting to see that Republicans who thought federal spending was too high was 46%/71% during Trump/Biden administrations. I wonder what the split would be for Democrats and also for independents.
The total revenue for 2023 was $4.440T, but the spending was $6.134T. Looking backwards, 2019’s spending was $4.446T.
A few years later and we’re paying almost $1.7T more for government…is the government we’re paying for today $1.7T better than the one from 2019? Can anyone even tell me what we're getting for that extra money?
If we spent the same in 2023 as we did in 2019, the deficit would’ve been $6B instead of $1.693T deficit we actually had. If we spent in 2023 what we spent in 2018, there would have been a $332B surplus.
...all done in the name of [WE].
Most of the federal government budget is healthcare, national defense, Social Security, and interest on past borrowing. That is about 3/4 of the budget. The largest other category is veterans benefits, about 5% of the budget.
We claim that there is a lot of waste but other than the defense department it isn't clear where there could even BE a lot of waste.
You can’t be serious.
It amazes me how some can literally be so contradictory to the very existence of a USA. Spouting that the Union of States that ensures Liberty with a national defense is a waste in contrast to a [Na]tional So[zi]alist Empire.
You obviously have no reason to be in the USA short of to conquer it.
I suspect that the largest part of that increase is in SS and Medicare and good luck cutting those programs. Here are your choices;
- fix the SS funding at the 2019 number and pay everyone less, or kick off everyone that joined SS after 2019.
- fix Medicare funding at 2019 levels and when that run out no more healthcare until next year. Those waiting should be first in line for the next year.
- Or kick off everyone that came on Medicare in after 2019.
Actually, what we paid in 2023 income taxes was more than enough to cover all discretionary spending and interest to service the federal debt. And almost enough to cover shortages in SS and Medicare.
The budget busters were Medicaid ($616 billion), federal "income security" ($448 billion), and "other" mandatory non-discretionary ($502 billion). Together these three categories add up to $1.6 trillion, essentially the entire deficit.
Or invest those SS payroll deductions on index funds. I calculated that if I had put all my SS deductions into index funds and was withdrawing 5% now, the Dow Jones index would pay 3 times as much as SS, and the S&P 500 would pay 5 times as much.
I ran this for every starting year from 1926 on (when the S&P 500 was created). Some starting years were better than others, but only one starting year was worse than SS, at 96%. Every other year was better than SS.
There has been a huge increase in the cost of servicing the debt. Numbers reported are all over the place, some claiming over a trillion, up from 400 billion in 2019.
2019 (www.cbo.gov/publication/56324)
Social Security $1.0T
Medicare $644B
Medicaid $409B
Other $642B
Nondefense $661B
Defense $676B
Interest $375B
Total $4.407T
2023 (www.cbo.gov/publication/59727)
Social Security $1.3T
Medicare $839B
Medicaid $616B
Other $502B
Nondefense $917B
Defense $805B
Interest $659B
Income Security Programs $448B
Total $6.086T
Delta 2023 - 2019
Social Security $300B (+30%)
Medicare $195B (+30.28%)
Medicaid $207B (+50.61%)
Other -$140B (see note)
Nondefense $256B (+38.73%)
Defense $129B (+19.08%)
Interest $284B (+75/73%)
Income Security Programs $448B (see note)
Total $1.679T
Note: 2019's Other combines spending that is broken out into Other and Income Security Programs (covers SNAP and other things) in 2023; so the delta for Other is really $308B or an increase of 47.98%.
According to the inflation calculator I used (Minneapolis Fed) $4.407 in 2019 would be $4.823T in 2023...but we spent $6.086T or about $1.263T more than inflation alone would have accounted for.
(+75/73%) should be (+75.73%)
People don’t like programs that have no benefit to them. They are adamant about preserving their sacred cows.
Sadly, that is the case. Behind every dollar the government spend is a group that will go to the mat for their particular funds.
Since every program benefits someone, all cuts are political suicide.
Too many people like to commit 'armed-theft'.
Not enough people like not getting ripped-off.
So the ripped-off will give-up and the 'armed-robbers' will end up killing their own for survival. Gosh. The amount of times humanity has to repeat this mistake almost defeats their entire claimed intelligence over animals.
Last time I checked, several years ago, total local, state, and federal spending was $9-10T, 40% of GDP. There are roughly 250M adults in the country, which means governments were spending $40,000 per adult. Of course, taxes were about 10% less due to borrowing.
Point this out to people, and they don’t believe it. They didn’t pay close to $35K in taxes! Point out SS takes 15% cut right off the top. Sales taxes are roughly 10% on all non-food purchases. That’s 25% right off the bat. Income tax is variable, call it another 10%. Property tax is 1-2%, several thousand per year, and yes, renters do pay it, indirectly. Everything you buy pays the business’s taxes.
I’d like to see some kind of truth in taxes law, that everything you buy has to include a sticker detailing how much of the price went to taxes.
When I moved from Delaware to Ohio, I was appalled not just at how much higher the taxes were but at how many different taxes there were. So one day, I started keeping track of all the taxes I paid, either directly or indirectly.
When the answer crossed 50%, I stopped counting because I realized I couldn't handle the answer.
Pennsylvania has state, city and county taxes on income…all for the worst union run roads in the country and Philly airport. Oh yeah, you have pay to use the POS PA turnpike also.
That actually exists for most purchases. Airline tickets will usually show taxes, as do car rental and hotel rooms. Most receipts will include taxes. The reality is that people rarely add these incremental taxes up and there is no central place to go for the end of the month or year total.
.
As usual, pollsters frequently come out with the answers that they intentionally or unconsciously went in with. More importantly, polls are responded to by people who may know nothing whatever about the subject of the questions. The problem here is that poll questions are extremely sensitive to the wording, with only slight differences in wording producing widely divergent results. Also, opinion polls are subject to the emotional context at the time of the questioning. The bottom line is that, although opinion polls may be interesting as entertainment, they should not be used by anyone for any serious purpose. It is not a matter of opinion that large amounts of money are wasted by government officials every year due to corruption and incompetence. It is not a matter of opinion that huge amounts of money are being spent for things that one demographic or another does NOT want government to spend money on. And it is NOT a matter of opinion that government is not very effective at doing even the few things that it must do under the Constitution.
There’s a reason the D.C. area and suburbs are the wealthiest in the U.S.
As a Gen Xer, I’ve never figured social security in my retirement mix,( it’s been bankrupt forever). Good for me.
Just learned that after a lifetime of having a gun held for SS taxes, the same federal government taxes up to 85percent of the payout. Get this, they start taxing at poverty level retirement incomes. 32k married couple. Single 25~k. 50 percent of payout.
Feds in freefall.
https://smartasset.com/retirement/is-social-security-income-taxable
Have paid income tax on SS for a number of years I am aware of this fact. I think it is silly for the government to pay out money and then turn around and tax the money. Why not just pay out less and then not tax it at all. No reason to have the IRS involved. Address less wealth recipients through the overall tax rate.
If it was free - it would still be overpriced.
60% say their taxes are too high. 39% pay nothing at all. I assume there is 1% in the Goldilocks zone where taxes are just right?
I assume there is 1% in the Goldilocks zone where taxes are just right?
Yes. We call them politicians.
The expense isn't even the primary problem with much of what the government does. I submit then more than half of federal government spending it outright unconstitutional. I am not a supporter of a lot of state and local government spending either.