Posted on 11/12/2002 11:46:28 PM PST by JohnHuang2
As for me, I 'd rather a 10 % flat tax.
President Bush wants to make his death tax eviseration perminant. I want him to do that too ! Ditto the rest of that agenda. But ... think what a consumption tax would REALLY do . It might get rid of THIS form of the IRS ; however, some other such entity would , of necessity , have to replace it.
You want to defund the governemnt; so do I, to some extent. If it was completely defunded, how could it support the military ? Tarrifs , alone, on top of a consumption tax isn't going to " cut it ".
LONG LIVE OUR REPUBLIC !
"In 1794, Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees. James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object, saying, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." James Madison, you'll recall, is the acknowledged father of the Constitution, and he couldn't find constitutional authority for spending "on the objects of benevolence."
Your congressman might say, "Madison was all wrong; after all, there's the 'general welfare' clause." Here's what Madison had to say about that: "With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." Thomas Jefferson echoed similar sentiments saying, "Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
When the great generation was born, Congress spent only three percent of the GDP. Today, as the great generation dies off, Congress spends over a quarter of the GDP. There is no constitutional authority for at least three-quarters of that spending."
Wow! Only three percent of GDP! If they could do, we can do it!
Yes you are. You're thinking a value-added tax (VAT).
A National Retail Sales Tax (NRST) is only on end-users.
Neither is inflationary, per se; a VAT hides the costs of government in the retail price, The NRST puts it out in front of the consumer (AKA voters).
Many places already have a city / state consumption tax, on some things. N.Y.C. and Chicago's is already almosts 9 %. I rather doubt that a Fed Gov consumption tax would only be 10 % ; however, if it were, added onto already existing VAT , that would come up to 20%, in some places. Since the vast majority of people, in this country, don't pay THAT in Income tax, they would certainly be angry as the dickens. Then, there is state income tax and in someplaces, city income taxes. Neither would be done away with, I presume. Add property taxes to the mix. With NO Fed income taxes, there'd be NO mortgage deductions. There'd be NO charitable deductions.
From family stories, I know, full well, what life was like prior to unemployment benefits, etc. I know what would have to happen, without any governments teats. This country , for the most part, doesn't know that and they would have one gigantic hissy fit ! What would those , now getting Social Security ( and I'm NOT talking about the cheats )do ?
Jim, we mostly want the same thing. What I, unlike you, can see, is that it just can't be done in one fell swoop. This isn't 1780,nor even 1880. Incrementilism is the ONLY way to turn back the clock. It's how that clock got started, in the first place. This isn't an aggranian nation any more. This isn't a small nation, clinging to the shores of the Atlantic Ocean. The STATES weren't doing that great a job of " handling things " in the 1880s; how could they now ?
Here's another tidbit to chew on. Barttering was still previlant, not so very long ago. Push for this , IMMEDIATELY , and we're back to an underground marketplace, rather quickly, and a lot of funds get diverted away from the Fed Gov. Yes, more cash would come from that same , now, underground vault; it just couldn't supply enough to do the paltry things you calim that it should only do.
Would the upper middle and upper classes try to find some way around a consumption tax ? Look at what happened when the " LUXURY TAX " was instituted a few years back !
Capital Gains taxes would, I assume , now be gone , only to be replaced by a 10 % ( or more ? ) consumption tax ? On the purchase of EVERY stock and mutual fund and option, etc. ? Watch the Markets crash and burn !
Housing sales ? P-O-O-F !
There just HAS to be some way to get the GOV out of our pockets; but, this isn't it .
There were NO public schools, in 1794.
Our bounderies protected us; naturally, in 1776.
Almost NO ONE was actively engaged in the Stock Market, in 1794.
The country was vastly smaller and contained a more homogenious populace ; not to mention a radically smaller one, in 1794.
Slavery was alive and well, in 1794, as was indentured servitude.
There were NO nukes, in 1794.
Israel didn't exist, in the midst of a hostile Arab wprld, in 1794. Are you suggesting that the USA abandon Israel now ?
Need I go on ? :-)
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.