Besides, how does temporarily restricting spending have any effect on the government? Seems to me the only people it might hurt (if it were effective, which it won't be - see above) would be merchants.
A better approach would be to refuse en masse to pay income taxes. The IRS is marginally constitutional at best anyway, and this would have a real impact. The problem here is obviously that it would take a very large number of people to participate, and that some would almost certainly be made examples of via IRS persecution if not outright prosecution. Also a problem is that most Americans have little control over tax payment thanks to the evil of witholding. The only option here would be for people to claim the maximum number of deductions, and to start doing it at the beginning of the tax year.
Something must be done, but the proposal contained in this post is only half-baked, I'm afraid. I'm all for pushing back hard (it's long overdue), but we must be SMART about how we do it.
Exactly. What really needs to be done is an honest to goodness tax revolt, where we all withold tax payments to the fed. The big problem with that is that most folks have excess witholdings looking for a big refund. If we all were in the position of having to write a tax check every April 15 (or thereabouts), collectively we could put a real hurtin on the fed.
I have always stated these same thoughts to all. Whether retired or not, what if we ALL had tax deductions from our income halted? My accountant said that if you even claimed nine, and broke even in the end, there would be no penalty nor could the IRS do anything about it. If you didn’t pay until midnight of the 14 of April, as long as your responsible amount was paid, you would be fine. The IRS confirmed. This would hurt more if for one whole YEAR, everyone did this. Naturally we would have to be responsible and have this money ready to pay up, but the government would be hurt drastically and forced to cut back the perks and non-essential staff... think about it.
Also some not so good points. As a wage earner and a consumer you have no other way to affect the government except through the merchant, retailer and wholesaler. They lose, the government also loses.
But there is a more serious problem. Employers play a role here too, and their cooperation, overt or indirect would be necessary for things to work. In most workplaces covered by a union, a day off must be accounted for, either by taking paid vacation time, or paid sick leave.
Net effect on government : zero.
Mind you, I think it's a great idea. Each day a worker fails to earn his normal daily amount deprives the government, state and federal combined of around 0.4% of their yearly protection money.
Take a whole week off without pay and it starts to matter; Two percent would definitely get their attention.
On the other hand, has anyone ever heard of "inputed" income? If you are a high earner and decide to stop working altogether, the government can tax you on the amount you would have earned, had you not quit.
They can't do that you say?
If they can fine you for not buying health insurance, they can fine you for anything!