Implicit in your belief, as well as the founders', is the notion that the federal government taxes businesses and states only. A head-tax should replace the income tax and the states should figure out how to best pass that burden along to their citizens.
I suspect you had better take a closer look at history for the founders expessed intent as regards taxation under the Constitution.
Refer comments #23 & #36. Taxes on commerce & consumption were the preferred mode, with capitations and poll taxes relegated to the last resort position along with taxes on property (i.e. direct taxes).
You must admit that we have gone way past the era of the founders' vision of taxation in this country. If we were to return to their proscirption we would put American industry at a disadvantage in the current global marketplace. If we do go forward with a national sales tax I fear that the compromises necessary to pass it will create monsterous unfairnesses and be even worse than the IRS eventually. In keeping with the spirit of Federalism, don't you think a system that shifts away from taxing individuals and back to states (the natural client of any national government) is less likely to increase Washington's intrusiveness? Pitting state governments against the federal in the arena of taxes should cause more scrutiny of spending overall.
"Refer comments #23 & #36. Taxes on commerce & consumption were the preferred mode, with capitations and poll taxes relegated to the last resort position along with taxes on property (i.e. direct taxes)."
I don't think I dissagree? I can still dream, can't I?