Posted on 12/22/2003 7:32:21 PM PST by Conservomax
Many politicians seem to think that the answer to every alleged problem is higher taxes. Howard Dean, for instance, has said he would repeal the Bush tax cuts -- even though this would boost the average family’s tax burden by nearly $2,000.
This initiative sounds radical, and it is. But some proposals out there are even worse.
The United Nations, for instance, wants to create an International Tax Organization (ITO) that would have the power to interfere with national tax policies.
This crazy idea first surfaced two years ago in a report from the world body’s “High-Level Panel on Financing for Development.” Since then, the U.N. has been working to turn it into reality. For instance, U.N. General Secretary Kofi Annan recently called for the creation of a global tax commission. But no matter what it’s called, an international bureaucracy with power over tax policy would be an assault on American sovereignty.
An international tax organization, of course, would mean higher taxes and bigger government. Indeed, U.N. officials have been quite open about their intentions. The chairman of the U.N. panel that first endorsed the creation of an ITO said that it would “take a lead role in restraining tax competition.” According to this mentality, it’s unfair for America to have lower taxes than places such as France and Germany, especially if it means that jobs and investment flee Europe’s welfare states and come to America.
For all intents and purposes, the U.N. wants to create an “OPEC for politicians.” Governments would conspire to keep taxes high, and countries with free-market tax systems -- such as the United States, Switzerland, Ireland and Hong Kong -- would be targeted for persecution.
The U.N. also wants the power to levy its own taxes. The original report looked at two options, a tax on currency transactions and a tax on energy consumption. Both of these proposals would hit America hardest. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. In the past, the U.N. has endorsed new taxes on the Internet, including a tax on e-mail. Again, the U.S. economy would pay the lion’s share if this reckless idea took effect.
But the prize for the worst U.N. idea probably belongs to the proposal to give governments permanent taxing rights over emigrants. You see, the U.N. thinks it’s unfair when talented people leave high-tax socialist nations and move to places such as America. But since even the U.N. realizes it would be unacceptable to prohibit emigration, the bureaucrats are instead proposing to let governments tax income earned in other nations.
This scheme is a direct attack on American interests because of our high levels of immigration -- particularly the well-educated portion of the immigrant population. For instance, if a doctor from the Caribbean moves to America, his home government would get to tax income he earns here. If a Chinese entrepreneur moves to Silicon Valley, the Chinese government would get to tax his U.S. income.
Foreign-born workers in the United States, including both citizens and resident aliens, earn nearly $600 billion each year. Imagine the damage if foreign governments could tax that income. Even if they imposed only a 15 percent tax rate, foreign governments could drain nearly $100 billion from our economy.
There is an understandable temptation to dismiss these U.N. proposals as silly. After all, the United States can veto any bad initiatives. But this passive approach is a mistake. What would happen, say, if Howard Dean were president when the U.N. was voting whether to create an International Tax Organization? Could we trust him to veto this nutty scheme?
Another reason we should worry: The U.N. is just one of several international bureaucracies working to undermine fiscal sovereignty. The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) targets “harmful tax competition” and the Brussels-based European Union enthusiastically backs “tax harmonization.”
What’s particularly troubling is that U.S. taxpayers are footing the bill for much of this nonsense. We don’t belong to the European Union, but we pay 25 percent of the costs at the U.N. and the OECD.
Fortunately, some members of Congress are trying to address this. For example, Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y., has introduced legislation that would end U.S. funding of these bureaucracies if they insist on pursuing policies that undermine America. Bureaucrats at the U.N. and OECD don’t want to risk their bloated budgets and tax-free salaries, so this is a good approach.
Clearly we have to do something -- unless we want to see our tax bills soar
You're not kidding........UNESCO is controlling our national parks & the Security Council our foreign policy (at least if the Democrats have their way).
The only question: will we wake up in time?
Y'Know, the US Gov't CREATED the "UN" to try to PREVENT furthur International Aggression.
It Appears the "UN" was "MISERABLY UNSUCCESSFUL" in It's "Attempt" to avert international Aggression.
Currently, the ONLY SUCCESSFUL "FORCE" capable of "Enforcing" International Peace is the "US-British-ETC Coalition" now Operating in Iraq.
Perhaps the "Hapless Advocates" of "International Peace" should Consult the "Members" of the "Bush Coalition" to Discover HOW "Said Coalition" has Managed to Pacify Iraq!!
SOMEHOW, the "BUSH TEAM" has managed to "FLUMMOX" the "Doom-Sayers!!"
WHAT FUN!!
Doc
Amen! Move the nutty bastards to Brussels or Geneva, closer to their socialist/communist comrades. We don't need the UN, they need us. Without the US, there is no UN! And I, for one, and damned sick and tired of these despots who are not worthy of licking the boots of our poorest telling us what to do!!!!!!
May I have the honor of voting with you?
I suggest you do some more reading, then. In case you haven't noticed (and from the looks of your post, you haven't), the moratorium on taxing the Internet has lapsed (thanks to Congress). Moreover, the U.N. recently stated that they want to take control of the Internet...and all that that implies.
It's no longer the drumbeat of the alarmist...the nightmare scenarios of the U.N. in charge are starting to gain legitimacy among the sheeple.
Likewise. I'll bring extra ballots and voting initiatives. ; )
Your point? What has the U.N. stepped into that it didn't leave in worse shape than it was originally?
Yes, I have read much on the topic of an email tax and it has proven over and over again to be bogus. Its completely unenforceable no matter who decides to tax it.
As for the rest of your post, control of the structure of the Internet itself rests with several multi-national corporations such as AT&T, MCI, SBC, Deutsche Telekom and others. The Internet exists in its present state because it generates cash flow for these companies. Take away the cash flow and shut down, or severely restrict the Internet. (Which may not be a bad idea; maybe a lot of us would get more done.) Just how is the UN supposed to wrest control from these guys? This all sounds like a lot of tin foil stuff.
And, the Internet is taxed in a lot of states. Texas, for one, has the Texas Infrastructure Fund which is a 1% tax that providers pass on to users in addition to sales tax. There are many other examples throughout these united states. The moratorium that Congress has yet to act on is a moratorium on sales tax for goods purchased over the Internet. The Internet itself and access to it has plenty of taxes in the US.
Read up, happy camper!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1037924/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1038831/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1038417/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1037471/posts
Lots more where those came from.
I agree. HD just gave Kofi his wet dream......................Control of the USA military, which is IMO the primary goal of the UN.
If the USSC hears about it they will approve of it. Sandra Day O'Connor says we have to use foreign laws as guidelines for our own governance, remember?
So the UN is talking about bringing the Inet to the 3rd world. Good for them. None of these posts or the others that I've read refute the fact that cash flow to big telecommunications companies drives the growth of the Internet. Take away that cash flow and the Inet gets severely resticted compared to its present state.
Let them talk all they want. But if the Inet is to come to the 3rd world, there has to be a way for someone to make a buck first.
You give the UN a whole lot more credit than they deserve on this issue.
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.