The reviews are in

Having criticized the Globe and Mail's Eric Reguly for failing to follow up on Stephen Harper's "no such thing as a good tax" position, I'm glad to see that Adam Radwanski has started to raise some questions (even if Harper isn't around to answer them):

Perhaps Harper was oversimplifying; maybe he didn't fully think through what he was saying. But this is the prime minister of the country, not some guy who's had one too many drinks at a cocktail party and begun railing against the evils of government. So it seems to me we're obliged to consider the fact that the person running the country, by his own account, thinks all taxes are bad.

If taken to its logical conclusion, that would also mean that all government spending is bad. Not just equalization and grants and other things that Harper would have taken offence to back in his National Citizens Coalition days. We're also talking about defence, and law enforcement, and any public infrastructure whatsoever - stuff that even the most libertarian members of Harper's party would concede that we need.

Now, it's probably fair to assume that the Prime Minister does not in fact favour anarchy, much as I like the possibilities for his next campaign song. But if he believes anything close to what he says he believes in, you have to wonder how he manages to get through each day on his current job - particularly at a time when the government has vastly increased spending in response to the recession. It's somewhat akin to the CEO of a $250-billion corporation presiding over its expansion, while simultaneously hinting that the corporation shouldn't exist.