As a medium of exchange, money acts as the impartial arbiter between two or more consenting individuals. Money inherently has no worth beyond the perceived value of the next transaction. So its worth, then, is in the eyes of the beholder. In the example of higher education, George Leef in the April edition of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs “Perspective,” thinks that the best way to improve higher education is to dole out grant money to individuals who will be attending college instead of giving that money directly to the institution. This would, according to George, “create an incentive [for schools] to attract students with their educational programs.” In some instances, people may feel like they’re not getting their money’s worth. Chad Adams, using the recent By The Numbers report, spoke to Lee County about their increasing tax burden in conjunction with their local government services. Some of this increased cost could be going to infrastructural improvements, but a growing trend shows more money going to tax incentives for new industry, a point Chad made to Charlotte Mayor Pat McCrory on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” And even at the state level, representatives will have to figure out the value of their two billion dollar tax surplus. Will they feel the need to create new programs (after paying for new and expanded programs), or will they give the money back to residents? Joe Coletti, in speaking on WSJS 600AM in Winston-Salem, hopes for the latter. At the federal level, George Leef, in a thought similar to Joe’s, hopes that calls for more IRS auditing in order to capture the income of less-than-honest taxpayers, fails. He hopes that the money stays with the people.
