I'm not going shopping this weekend.

That's right. Even though today is the beginning of the Great Three-Day Tax-Free Shopping Bonanza, I'm staying home.

I know what you're thinking: I must be CRAZY to pass up deals like these! I could be getting big, big savings of up to 8.25 percent for ONE WEEKEND ONLY!

So be it. I'd like to dedicate my retail abstinence to the millions of subprime and adjustable-rate mortgage holders who are now or soon may be facing default or eviction because of overhyped loans.

What's the connection? We are.

The tax "holiday" caters to the belief that consumerism alone ensures a perfect economy. It's the notion that consumers have a responsibility, even a patriotic duty, to spend
even if it's not in our best financial interests.

Terrorists attack U.S. soil? Spend on, says the president, and keep America strong. Economic slowdown looming? No problem. Don't sacrifice. The Federal Reserve will cut interest rates so we can buy more and pay less.

We've become so conditioned to it that we don't think twice about marketing that tells us the more we spend, the more we save.

The savings this weekend, though, are nominal. If stores advertised a 9-percent-off sale, most shoppers probably couldn't be bothered to pry themselves from their La-Z-Boys.

But you can bet that this weekend, malls from The Woodlands to Sugar Land will be as clogged as if the stockings were already hung by the chimney. Our populist blood runs deep.

"It's enormously popular," said Ray Perryman, a Waco economist who often advises the state on economic matters. "The fact that you're not paying taxes, people kind of enjoy that. It's great politics."

When the tax holiday was created, lawmakers justified it by arguing that it offers relief to the poor, who pay a disproportionate amount of their income in sales tax. But encouraging a spend-and-save mentality in the poor doesn't make them less poor.

In fact, if lawmakers really wanted to shield the indigent from the sales tax's regressive nature, they would offer tax rebate vouchers on back-to-school items for low-income residents.

That way the poor could buy what they needed, when they needed, and still get tax relief.

But the political payoff from such a program is narrow. Why not spread the welfare to every citizen with a credit card?

The state comptroller's office estimates that taxpayers will "save" more than $52 million during this year's festivities, up from the $49 million predicted last year. Every year, in fact, we "save" more. The comptroller's estimates have increased 53 percent since 2000.

The total economic impact, though, is unclear. People who spend more this weekend probably will spend less later.

"A lot of spending is shifted into this weekend" from later in the year, Perryman said.

This year, the big "news" leading up to the "holiday" was the addition of some backpacks to the exemption list. That's one way the state keeps expanding the so-called savings, by adding to the list of tax-exempt items, thereby encouraging more spending.

If the state can afford to wave off $52 million in taxes every year, doesn't that mean it's actually collecting too much? Aren't all citizens then entitled to a refund or a tax cut, not just those who brave the crazed throngs and get "malled" this weekend?

And if the state can't afford to pass up the revenue, how is it making up for the shortcoming? What other taxes or fees are being levied to make up the difference?

I understand it's just a gimmick. But that's exactly the point. Is it the job of state government to engage in gimmicks to separate citizens from their money? Consumers and their money? Don't we already have the lottery for that?

As consumers, we're predisposed to the siren call of easy money. No money down; buy now, pay later; why wait?; no credit, no problem — all slogans ingrained in the consumerist lexicon.

The more you spend, the more you save? No, the more you spend, the more you spend, regardless of whether you're paying sales tax.
