"Not sure what the point of this article is? Just about everyone knows that Oklahomans are consistantly ranked as having the lowest of over all tax burdens of any state. Even conservative groups that abhore taxes, who rank the states, rank Oklahoma as one of the lowest, if not the lowest, tax state. If its "disturbing" that we pay the taxes we do, when they are the lowest, I think the authors would be thankful. Perhaps if they are looking at other rankings such as Oklahomans having worse health, higher drug use, high divorce rates, high drop out rates, some of the worst roads, high rates of homelessness, some of the highest rates of hunger, child abuse and neglect, etc. etc. do they find those numbers more pallatable?
Nothing is free.
Just as a people can be taxed too much, it must also be possible that a people can be taxed too little. When people gather together to fix a societies ills, or make an investment, its either going to cost them their money or their time. Both can be effectively or ineffectively spent. But apparently our low tax state status hasn't translated into better time spent. "Theoretically" our lowest in the nation tax burden should be handing us a relative heaven flowing with milk and honey. Right? But the horrible showings in those things listed above, do not bear that out.
Perhaps it would be wiser to not focus solely on ever lower taxes, but focus more on efficiency and results. Less taxes to an inefficient government having programs that deliver poor results will get you even poorer results. Less taxes will not necessarily equate better or more efficient programs. Only better and more efficient programs will do that. Even small towns with very little taxes and a very small government can be poorly run and inefficient. Its not about the size or the amount, the focus should be on the results and what it takes to get them ."