Just one quick note: we are not just “fighting for a percentage point or two.” We are fighting, at least on the side of the angels, for the principles of individual sovereignty, the sanctity of private property, and the rule of law.

To say “maybe we are close to the limit” is part of the problem. You don’t know what that taxation limit is because you have no firm definition of the role of government on which to base spending, hence taxing, requirements. Nor is their any objective, non-arbitrary process for setting a limit on taxation.

When asked what the limit was on Almanac North, your response was “100 percent is too high and zero is too low,” and you avoided any specific number, again, because in the progressive philosophy there is no objective, non-arbitrary way to arrive at a number.

If you want to tinker with the LaBron James analogy, it might go something like this: The Obama administration passes the “Cap and Pass” act, which caps the number of points an NBA player can score at his previous season average. When a player reaches his average, he cannot score again and must pass to a teammate. For a team to increase its allowable points, it must adjust its roster, not with the intent of creating a better more exciting team, but a team that is best suited to the rules of parity. It would only be fair.

So anyway, just a couple points in rebuttal, to rebuttal. “Anti-tax” and “anti-government” is shorthand for sure but I insist that it’s a fair representation of the general tenor of the economic conservative position. These are not “straw men” I’m talkin about here. Raw contempt for federal state and local government, its current scope and size, and close to hatred for taxes in principle is right on the surface for Norquist, Limbaugh, Bachman, Palin, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and all the dominant leading voices of economic conservatism in the nation and state. Norquist has said that he wants to cut government in half and then in half again, and this is the real father of the no new taxes pledge in Minnesota.

Thanks for acknowledging my allowing the fact that taxes at some point do matter and that business concerns about them should be heeded. Again, maybe we are close to the limit and that’s why the battles are so hard at this point. And we are fighting for a percentage point or two in Minnesota. Also it’s not contradictory to point out a century’s growth in the public sector and also point to a recent decline in the percent invested on the public sector.

I do think your analogy of LeBron James as capitalism and taxes and government as dead weight on his ankles is inspired but also absurd. A better one would be LeBron and the Cavaliers’ second leading scorer as capitalism, the guys that actually rack up the points, and the rest of the team as government, non-profit sector, and all the other supporting roles. As the playoffs showed, it takes a team (maybe even a village).

I do hope you print this on your website.