I don't think we're sure what makes it and what doesn't. Some of the first radio broadcasts were very strong and maybe even directed more, but over time due to competition limits were put on transmission power. Then there's the question of general direction vs. a directed beam which would have more distance before it gets lost. Lastly, lower bandwidths were used as technology modernized, which would hide more in the background.
But even if the strongest part gets to a planet and lasts for years, what if their time to invent and use radio is still far in the future, or gone in the past and they don't even look in those frequencies. It could be more a matter of timing than anything else.
I still wait for the darkly humorous joke until it really happens message to us, "Shhhh, they'll hear you."
The two arguments against the reasoning that tax burdens are too high are simple questions - who is paying the majority of these taxes, and how efficient are the taxes being used. Once you realize the answers to those questions, saying anything beneficial to the public is too expensive becomes moot. Now if your argument as written means that taxes are unfairly distributed and used for the wrong things and there isn't anything anyone can do to change that, you already understand my first point and are just resigned to remain oppressed and used.