And dumping the income tax completely is a bad idea.
The problem with a consumption tax is that when the economy tanks government revenues do too. Thus the very time that you need the government to step in and help people, government ends up in dire straits too. The income tax is far more stable than a consumption tax.
Instead raise the import tariffs until they are at least equal to the tax on domestic producers plus the cost of unemployed Americans. And reduce the income tax by an equal amount.
That would encourage industries to remain in the U.S. and relocate to the U.S.. It would put Americans back to work. It would reduce government outlays for unemployed. It would boost government revenues because more people would be paying income tax. It would boost American manufacturing capacity which could be critical during a time of war. And it would make us less dependent on foreign countries.
That’s the problem: Government is not there to HELP people. It is there to provide law, order, and peace from external attack. All else is far beyond what the Constitution set up. .
You are framing the problem incorrectly.
The Constitution nowhere charges the Government with the duty to "help people."
And most people never really need the Government's dubious "help."
Regards,
Sorry, but you've got it backwards. Taxing income is taxing production or the creation of wealth. Bad idea. Taxing consumption is taxing the consumption of wealth. Better idea.
Remember, if you tax something, you get less of it. We should be encouraging production of wealth, not discouraging it.
As for government spending needed to boost the economy, that's Keynesian claptrap. It didn't work during the Depression. It didn't work during the stagflation of the 1970s. It didn't work during Japan's "lost decade." And it didn't work when congress passed a "stimulus package."
That idea is not a new one. During the Nineteenth Century, there was a whole parade of so-called "monetary cranks" who advocated creating more money as a way to prosperity. "Silver at sixteen to one (for gold)." "Greenbacks." William Jennings Bryan's famous "cross of gold" speech was a plea for inflation through debasing the currency, favoring debtors at the expense of creditors. Ironically, in Mark Twain's novel A CONNECTICUT YANKEE IN KING ARTHUR'S COURT, Twain has the Yankee explain to King Arthur why this doesn't work.
As for tariffs, they should be abolished. It is always to our advantage to be able to buy things from where they are the cheapest. Adam Smith said it better than I can say it in a short paragraph, and he's still right.
If you want to keep manufacturing at home, get rid of the government policies -- regulations and taxes -- that discourage it. That way we'll all be better off.