Posted on 02/10/2004 10:06:34 AM PST by ancient_geezer
http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/c-e/duke/2004/duke020904.htm
|
A Foolproof Tax Plan Former Chief Justice John Marshall once said, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.” And boy, was he right. Confiscate enough of people’s wealth and you’ve turned them into veritable serfs toiling dawn till dusk just to keep their heads above water. We’re not yet serfs in this society, but we’re getting closer all the time. As of now, the government takes 30-60% of our income and this translates into working until May of every year for Uncle Sam – and our hours are getting longer. You see, every year the government grows, and what does this mean? It means it creates new programs and programs require money to administer. It means that every year it creates new laws, regulations and mandates, and the bureaucracies which are necessary to enforce them require money to operate. But not just money – LOTS of money. Money is the lifeblood of government; it is what keeps the heart of the big government beast beating, and this growing boy needs lots of transfusions. Distressing as it is that this government vampire is sucking us dry through an open wound, more distressing still is the salt that is thrown into it. What is this? It’s the fact that after forcibly extracting an exorbitant amount of our resources from us, the government then uses our own money to tyrannize us. After all, the laws, regulations and mandates that our booty is used to enforce take away our freedoms. Statist Karl Marx said, “When we hang the capitalists, they will sell us the rope.” I’d say that the spirit of Marx lives on in the statists in Washington and they are hanging us, and we’ve given them the rope. Unfortunately, the problem can only get worse because the tax system we now have is fatally flawed, as it ensures constant movement towards higher taxes and bigger government. But there is a way to put this government beast on a diet and get him in shape, and then put him in the cage that used to be his home. The solution is a simple, three-pronged tax plan that would strike fear into the hearts of the Washington pickpockets, and here it is. 1. Create a law stating that there must be national referenda on ALL tax increases. What this means is that every time a politician proposed a tax increase, it would have to go up for a vote of the people. A radical idea, I know, but it would actually have to be passed by a majority of those whose money would be taken before it could go into effect. I would prefer to make a 2/3rds majority the necessary margin, but if the country wouldn’t find this idea palatable I’d settle for a simple majority. We could decide this as a nation. What this would do, though, is truly put power back in the hands of the people. And that’s what it’s all about. After all, who should have control over OUR money? Not some politician who’s willing to sell his soul and use a half a billion dollars of our money to buy another 10,000 votes. Not some special interest lobbying group that can make limp-wristed politicians’ knees shake and cause them to funnel a billion of our dollars to its pet cause. We should. It’s the fruits of OUR labors and before one thin dime of it is taken, OUR permission should have to be granted. 2. Create a law stating that there may only be ONE form of federal taxation. This measure would serve to achieve a very important goal, which is the elimination of the multitude of hidden takes that now exist. There are taxes on virtually everything: plane tickets, phone bills, gasoline, and a long list of others that almost no one is even aware of. Politicians love these hidden taxes. This is because raising taxes isn’t popular and Mr. Sneaky Politician knows that if people are aware of his raising of them, he might have to incur the wrath of the voter at election time. So you see, hidden taxes allow these weasels to raise taxes with impunity; the action never makes it onto the radar screen, so the offending politicians’ careers won’t be shot down. The first measure [national referenda] alone would put an end to this skullduggery, because if politicians wanted to attempt to raise taxes they would have to do it in the light of day. The voters would be aware of it, and then they could make informed decisions in the voting booth and hold shameless politicians accountable for their actions. However, we should simply dispense with these phantom taxes altogether because they ensure that most people won’t be fully aware of how great a tax burden they’re carrying. If we eliminated hidden taxes, the true degree of taxation would be starkly apparent to everyone. 3. Make that one form of taxation a national sales tax. Think about it: if you approached someone on the street and asked him how much he earned per year, what would the probable response be? Most of us know: he would refuse to answer and state that it was personal information – he would say in essence “none of your business.” Yet, when people operating within the context of the government agency called the IRS ask us the very same question, we obediently provide that information and much, much more. We not only tell them how much we make but also how we make it, what we spent much of it on, and whatever other details our feudal lords require us to divulge. The truth is that we should tell those in government the same thing we’d be told on the street: none of your business – because it isn’t their business. The income tax as it is now constituted is coercively intrusive and therefore is an affront to the principles of freedom. Another positive benefit of eliminating the income tax is that the withholding tax would also become a thing of the past. Established in 1943 to help finance WW II [it ended, didn’t it?], this tax serves a similar purpose to that of hidden taxes, in that it diminishes people’s awareness of and resistance to taxation. Politicians know this; they know that this incremental, stealthy removal of resources changes people’s perspective because they never have possession of this withheld money – they never see it. It’s “out of sight out of mind.” Consequently, not only don’t most people protest this excessive confiscation of their wealth, but many are actually happy when they get their refund checks from this robber baron government. But, you can rest assured, if Americans instead had to write the government a large, one lump sum check on April 15th, their tune would change markedly. A little sidenote here: the income tax is also contrary to the original intent of the founders of this nation and was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court at the end of the 19th century. Only the 16th Amendment, ratified in 1913, legalized this un-American practice and made it a fixture in the American landscape. Now, contrast a national sales tax model with the sad state of affairs outlined above. You wouldn’t have any complicated tax forms to fill out, nor would you have to negotiate the IRS’ labyrinthine trove of rules. You wouldn’t have to spend money on tax preparers, keep detailed books for your business, or account for every thin dime you make. And it would give you greater control over your finances because Uncle Sam wouldn’t see one penny of your income until YOU decided to spend it. Lastly, a national sales tax would be naturally progressive because wealthier people who buy bigger ticket items would pay more in taxes just as a matter of course . Politicians wouldn’t like this plan because it robs them of power and control over our lives. But we should have this power and control because we should be free people – not subjects. It’s time to say “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore,” and demand that this plan become part of the fabric of our government. We should remember that money is not just paper - it represents resources. The ability to feed and clothe our families, to obtain health care, to get a good education and a million other things – it represents the worldly dreams and aspirations of ourselves and our children. And yes, the power to tax IS the power to destroy, and the power to tax highly is the power to destroy mightily. This is why the people must control this power – not the political elitists. It’s time to cut the blood supply and slay this big government dragon and truly make ours, as Lincoln said, “A government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Selwyn Duke |
Just in case yah need sump'n to distract you.
Herman Cain for United States Senate, state of Georgia 2004 and
Vernon Robinson running for North Carolina's 5th Congressional District
That have announced their support for replacing the federal income tax with a national retail sales tax.
Get enough of these folks and folks like them elected & re-elected. And the NRST will be in our future.
He is ON TARGET with this article for sure!
23%........... Effective total federal tax rate with respect to consumption expenditure
14.91% ..... rate if Social Security and Medicare were eliminated
14% .......... rate if Nat'l Endowment for the Arts were eliminated
11.9%........ rate if Dept. of Education were eliminated
10% .......... rate if welfare were eliminated
9.8%.......... rate if foreign aid were eliminated
etc.
So lets look at what the maximum it would take to fund those functions clearly authorized under Article I Section 8 of the Constitution, in current dollars:
http://w3.access.gpo.gov/usbudget/fy2001/guide02.html#Spending
- $285 Billion --- Defense
- $ 49 Billion ---- Veterens Services
- $ 31 Billion ---- Administration of Justice
- $ 16 Billion ---- General Government
- $199 Billion ---- Interest on the Debt
=========================
$580 Billion ---- Total
Institute an across the board, Flat rate, single stage National Retail Sales Tax, which taxes all imports and domestic products with the same rate.
Replacing present all current federal tax law with a retail sales tax would be 23% on new goods and services paid and receipted at the retail register. No hidden tax, no exceptions, exemptions everyone participates.
Such a tax acts in a natural manner to encourage the elimination of excess government functions through visibility of burden among all constituencies of the electorate.
The total federal government budget would move from $2,000 billions towards something less than $580 billions calculated.
The across the board federal tax rate on new goods and services would decline towards less than 6.7%.
As tax rate on sales decreases the economic burden on retail items, the sales volumes and growth in the economy would be tremendous allowing even further reductions in tax rates below that less than 6.7% theoretic level.
That is what I perceive as the ultimate achievements possible under a National Retail Sales Tax structured in the manner of the revenue bill H.R.25. Simple common sense applied to the principal of TANSTAFFEL,( no free lunch, everyone participates in paying there way in proportion to the benefit the extract from their consumption.) encourages the natural change in attitudes required of the electorate as regards the burden of government largess in their lives.
- It is fairer to tax people on what they extract from the economy, as roughly measured by their consumption, than to tax them on what they produce for the economy, as roughly measured by their income
Hmmmmmm....... It's do able, with time and effort, once the blinders are removed from the electorate.
Dunno! Perhaps because it make PERFECT sense maybe! ;>)
The VAT is hidden, and insidious.
Bad idea.
One tax, at the retail level, that is totally visible.
And under the FairTax, the burden of regulation will be utterly removed from nonprofits, and all of the destructive and liberty-robbing game-playing will come to its rightful end.
Merge the two competing ideas for the national sales tax and the national VAT tax.
A VAT is the antithesis of a Retail Sales Tax, one justification of having a retail tax is to assure visibility, which a VAT tends to prevent.
A VAT is not a great idea, why would you want to tax the same things twice? and why hide the taxes that consumers ultimately pay by embedding them in retail prices?
How can anyone exercise that "Eternal Vigilance" necessary to keep government in check. That is part of the problem with income taxes + business taxes that we have. Much of the tax burden is hidden from view and is why:
70% of the voting public clamors for more from government expecting someone else to foot the bill and why over 60% of the voters PERCEIVE no problem with the taxrates and vote for polidiots that promise to bring home the most bacon
The problem with a national sales tax is that some of us who have been working for over 3 decades have managed to save in POST tax savings accounts; upon retirement when we want to use some of that ALREADY TAXED MONEY we would have to pay another tax on top of the first one. I do not support a national sales tax. A single rate flat income tax would be preferable. However, NO tax would be better still.
I propose that we limit the terms of the legislatures; make the bastards get a real job for six months out of the year. Less legislative time, less expense. Its as simple as that.
There is, in the end, only one real way to reverse the trend of ever-growing government power and authority: and I am afraid that it is not a very pleasent one. Half-hearted attempts to get the very criminals in government who are stealing the lifeblood of the nation to change is folly. They like the power and they are addicted to the money. On top of that, we have all been co-opted into the system because of our "contributions" to Social Security and Medicare. And there is a growing cadre of those who are total wards of the state and who have become so because of 60 years of the growing Welfare State. An end to welfare? Fat chance.
No tax on exports.
A Retail Sales Tax does not tax exports (unlike the income/payroll tax scheme of today that embedds taxes into the pricing of goods and services).
No exemption for non-profits, such as churches, foundations, etc.
All tax exemption status does is make contributions declarible as deductions in computing income and provide a hook to control such entities.
No income to compute, no deductions under a retail sales tax. No hook for control.
Most other trading partners are disadvantaging US companies in this manner.
True,
Our policies should be reciprocal.
Doesn't mean they should be identical, just border adjustable.
Exports are not a retail item, they are business activities not taxed under a "retail" sales tax.
Under a retail sales tax, no crediting for a VAT is required, the border adjustment is automatic by virtue of never having taxed an export at any production level in the first place.
OTOH, all consumer goods(which includes the any import material that went into them) are automatically hit with a retail sales tax when sold. Thus all imports are hit with the same tax rate as domestic goods, which is just the opposite of today's system.
There is neither need nor desirability for instituting a VAT. A VAT serves only to purposes to hide tax burdens, & collect the tax from citizens out of their control. Neither purpose is appropriate to a free nation.
The function of consumption taxes should include that option of the electorate to avoid them are excessive, a VAT defeats that potential:
Alexander Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury, said it best in Federalist Papers #21 when he stated:
"It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption
that they contain in their own nature a security against excess.They prescribe their own limit, which cannot be exceeded without
defeating the end proposed - that is, an extension of the revenue.When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty
that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four."If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection
is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when
they are confined within proper and moderate bounds.This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the
citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of
the power of imposing them.Impositions of this kind usually fall under the denomination of indirect
taxes, and must for a long time constitute the chief part of the revenue
raised in this country." (Emphasis added).
A broadbased VAT defeats this characteristic of consumption taxes as veiwed by the founders of the Constitution. A VAT is indistinguishable from a corporate income tax in operation. Income taxes are what we are trying to get rid of.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.