Part and parcel of my post yesterday about Work, Richard Conniff raises the subject of government spending, but in a whole new way.  He suggests that nobody likes paying their taxes because the word “tax” has so many bad connotations:

I propose we stop saying “taxes” and start calling them “dues.”

I’m perfectly fine with the negative connotations of the word “tax.”  Taxes are necessary, yes, but they are a drug to the recipient, and I don’t want to make drugs more appealing.  ”Dues” has the connotation of club membership, though, with benefits and privileges and responsibilities, which isn’t far from the bond we Americans have. 

Instead of denouncing taxes, politicians would do better to appeal to the patriotic corners of our hearts that warm to phrases like “we the people.” “Taxation” is a throwback to the time when kings picked our pockets. “Paying my dues,” a phrase popularized in the jazz music world, is language by which we can stand together as Americans.

Maybe if we start calling them “dues,” we can have a little more say in where the money goes. 

A billion dollars a year. Billion — with a “b.”

That’s how much cash U.S. religious organizations receive from donors. But tax laws enable such groups to be stingy with information they provide about where that money goes. For example, popular televangelists Rod Parsley, Joel Osteen, and Robert Schuller all refuse to disclose financial information to the public. Others avoid careful scrutiny by calling themselves a “church.”

Sen. Charles Grassley in 2007 targeted a number of large ministries, demanding a financial accounting. Some complied while some remained mum. How should the government proceed against less-than-transparent ministries? Where is the fiscal line between “church” and state?