Question for the Libertarians about taxes.

[Azwed]

Most of the people in your party, not all but a fair number, say that income taxes are wrong and unconstitutional. (Nevermind that their is a constituional ammendmant allowing them)

Well then how would you run the country without the income tax?

Here is the situation.

The Libertarian Party has control of the white house and a signifigant majority in the House or Reps. You don't have control of the Senate yet but if the current trend holds you will be next election.

For the most part you have complete control of government because you have some good coaliton buildiers in the Senate and can get your bills through.

Tell me what you do.

Eliminate the Personal Income tax?

Reduce it drasticly?

Cut all social programs?

Where is the money coming to run the government and where are the cuts going to be?

Reduced size of military?

Elimination of various exectutive departments?

I am curious so tell me.

Uncle Bill please keep responses to under say 5000 words

 

[KillerMuffin]

Bill will undoubtedly correct me for being wrong but the Libertarians believe in the barest minimum amount of government required to keep the country from descending into chaos and from invasion.

We'd cut the fed down to about 10%-15% of what it's currently sitting at, personnel wise, to include only the three branches and the military.

There would be no social programs or government subsidies for anything.

Still have no idea how they intend to get the cash to fund it since any form of taxation beyone sales and income is unfair and puts the burden of paying for government on the financial shoulders of select groups.

 

[Ishmael]

Taxes

Not true on the sales tax KM.

Eliminate the personal income tax. (there is a constitutional issue here and it is before the courts. There is a question as to the validity of it's validation by the States. Kentucky in particular.)

Regardless, a sales tax is fair and not regressive. Tax all non-essential items. That means no tax on food, shelter, medical, etc. That establishes a baseline econmomic "no tax zone".

Obviously, all other taxes would be eliminated too. Such as the unfair excise taxes that unfairly punish those least able to pay. (These are the Federal taxes on your phone bill, tires, gas, etc.) Corporate taxes would be eliminated too. But there would no tax 'write offs' for the 'cost of business' expenditures that corporations currently enjoy.

An initial tax of 17% would acheive nuetral revenue flow. Should that seem too much condsider that a solid middle class taxpayer is forking out 25+% currently.

There are those that wuold argue that this is, in effect, a 'tax break for the rich'. A valid point if the rich stop buying expensive cars, boats, etc. The rich tend to spend more for their toys, ergo, they'll pay more in taxes. And if they don't, they'll have to invest the money or put it in the hands of those that will invest the money, like banks. None of which is bad for the economy.

However the best thing about this form of taxation is that it's equitable (everyone gets hit the same for non-essentials.), discretionary (if you don't want to pay the tax, don't buy taxable items), and it's visible (The "Pols" can't screw with the rate without everyone knowing and understanding exactly what's going on.).

The biggest opponents of this form of taxation are the 'welfare statist's' and the States themselves. The 'welfare statist's' because it is their belief that every special interest group is entitled to live off the sweat of another person's brow. And the States because in many the primary form of taxation is the sales tax. They see the Federal government as a 'competitor'.

It is interesting to note that the government paid off it's WWII debt and rebuilt Japan and Europe with an income tax rate of 4.5%

Ishmael

 

[tortoise]

When I saw the title of this thread, I immediately thought of the Billy Bragg album Talking With the Taxman About Poetry.

But then again, I am a freak, so...

 

[Azwed]

About what I expected any more takers???

 

[Azwed]

What no takers????

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by Azwed
Most of the people in your party, not all but a fair number, say that income taxes are wrong and unconstitutional. (Nevermind that their is a constituional ammendmant allowing them)

Well then how would you run the country without the income tax?

That's an easy one.

With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.
Grace Commission Report

This report was commissioned by Ronald Reagan's presidency and was completed and presented to his office on January 12, 1984.

Note: transfer payments is social welfare spending.

This link is the source of the quote. http://www.taxstatement.cc/grace.asp

Originally posted by Azwed
The Libertarian Party has control of the white house and a signifigant majority in the House or Reps. You don't have control of the Senate yet but if the current trend holds you will be next election.

For the most part you have complete control of government because you have some good coaliton buildiers in the Senate and can get your bills through.

Tell me what you do.

In essence, return to a Constitutional Federal government which would include the following [no particular order implied]:

1. Establish the level of military readiness necessary to safeguard America, her people and their interests wherever they might be.
2. Eliminate the income tax without replacement.
3. Eliminate the estate tax.
4. Eliminate social welfare programs.
5. Eliminate corporate welfare.
6. Eliminate government run social security (privatize it).
7. Eliminate protectionist tariffs
8. Eliminate most cabinet positions. The only ones off-hand that would remain are Defense, State and Treasury. [I don't recall them all at this point so I may have omitted one or two others that are legitimate.]
9. Cleanse the Federal law books of every statute that is in conflict with or in violation of the Constitution.
10. Simplify the language of existing law to a level understandable by the average man.
11. Locate and deport any illegal immigrants and refuse them reentry on the basis of the fact that they violated immigration laws.

Originally posted by Azwed
Uncle Bill please keep responses to under say 5000 words

Concise enough?
Edited to add an item to the list

 

[Guru]

 

[Ishmael]

Unclebill

That's an easy one.

Eliminate the income tax without replacement.

Agreed in pricipal. Practical considerations dictate that this be "phased" in. Considering how dependent a great deal of the economy is on government (over 50% by last reckoning *this includes, federal, state, and local government employees.*) the ramifications of an instant shut down are enormous.

Eliminate most cabinet positions. The only ones off-hand that would remain are Defense, State and Treasury. [I don't recall them all at this point so I may have omitted one or two others that are legitimate.]

Sec. of Interior would have to remain for a while. 33% of all lands are government owned. (Most people are unaware of this. Over 700 million acres are Federally owned.)

The Attorney Generals dept. would remain. (DOJ)

Sec. of State would certainly remain. Foriegn dealings will continue.

Sec. of Commerce and Transportation are up for grabs.

The others can go.

Ishmael

 

[SINthysist]

Exactly.

Don't forget Tarriffs.

Every one needs to pay taxes in some form or another, and the sales tax is the best vehicle, so one can see what government really costs, and that one then has a vested interest in one's society and a proper say.

No one with thier hand out should be allowed to vote, because thier main interest then gets focused on the next handout. Something the Liberals capitalize on [no pun intended].

 

[CelestialBody]

 

[Azwed]

Would the Attorney Genereal then absorb the office of the Secretary General?
I'm not sure if that particular office is in the cabinet, or not, but I know that the AG handles all cases in which the US is the plaintiff/prosecuter, and the SG where the US is the defendent?

No that is not a cabinet position I think it is just a agency in the justice department.



Anyone who wants a list of all the cabinet offices and other offices of cabinet rank, those are two different things, can go here.

Current Cabinet


They also have pictures of all the people too.

I agree that there should definetly be some consolidation with the cabinet departments. The problem that has happend is that every little niche group has to feel special and get a cabinet rank office.

Offices that should remain
State
Defense
Treasury
Justice
Interior
Health and Human services

Pretty much all other cabinet offices can be lumped in with another office.

The State department is by itself

Defense can absorb Veterans Affairs(bit of trivia for you. Reagan created the Veterans Affairs cabinet position that was originaly just an agency even after he said he would eliminate at least one cabinet level office.)

Interior can get Agriculture

Treasury gets Commerce and Labor

Health and Human services gets, Housing/Urban development, Education and Trasportation

I am not really sure where to put the department of Energy. That is a necessary office but not something that requires cabinet rank. I can see it under either the Treasury or Health and Human services.

 

[NemoAlia]

Hey Tortoise, you have impeccable taste in tax music!

 

[Azwed]

shameless bump

 

[Ishmael]

Cabinet positions

Offices that should remain
State
Defense
Treasury
Justice
Interior
Health and Human services

Pretty much all other cabinet offices can be lumped in with another office.

The State department is by itself

Defense can absorb Veterans Affairs(bit of trivia for you. Reagan created the Veterans Affairs cabinet position that was originaly just an agency even after he said he would eliminate at least one cabinet level office.)

Interior can get Agriculture

Treasury gets Commerce and Labor

Health and Human services gets, Housing/Urban development, Education and Trasportation

I am not really sure where to put the department of Energy. That is a necessary office but not something that requires cabinet rank. I can see it under either the Treasury or Health and Human services.

Let's start with DOE. It's an artifact created by Jimmy Carter to make us feel as if the government was dealing with the fuel crisis of the '70's. It has two missions. Nuclear weapons programs (along with the chemical explosives used therein.) and energy resource developement, both alternate and conventional. Move the weapons to DOD, and the other crap to commerce. Fold the tent on this one.

Yep, consolidate the Health and Human as mentioned above with the exception of Transportation going to Commerce. Then fold up the tent on H&H. There are portions of the Health issues that are important and should be continued. Particlarly those research projects concerning immunizations and epidemic control. The really important tasks could probably fit neatly under DOD (protection of the population, not to mention the fact that DOD is already funding many of these programs anyway because of the threat of chemical and biological warfare).

Education and Housing are, and always have been, a bust. Virtually everything tried has failed.

Agriculture could be partitioned off and dispersed. The inspections portion going to Treasury, the land management portion going to Interior.

Just some thoughts.

Ishmael

 

[patient1]

Well, I think that transportation serves commerce & Defense, so it should be grouped with them, rather than with human services.

 

[patient1]

It's time I said:

"Ishmael, I like the way you think."

 

[Ishmael]

Thank you

It's time I said:

"Ishmael, I like the way you think."

Don't get too far ahead of yourself.

Thanks,
Ishmael

 

[Azwed]

Great input we should start a committie for the consoledation of government Departments and agencies.

 

[Hamletmaschine]

As a died in the wool librarian, I can tell you unequivocally that our position on Texas is that it's a big motherfucking state. Ought to have chopped that sumbitch up a long time ago, like we'd originally planned.

 

[Unclebill]

Forgot DOJ. That would be retained also.

As to the other areas, like I said, return to a Constitutional government. Thus Interior functions would be incorporated under Treasury. And much of the government holdings would be processed for disposition and liquidation.

HHS, DOE, Education & Transportation, Commerce and Labor, HUD are all outside the powers enumerated in the Constitution; they go. The weapons portion of DOE would be returned to DOD where it should have been all along. The rest of DOE is not a legitimate government function.

And the Congressional Retirement rip-off scheme would go. I'd even consider prosecuting the ones who built that system since it is definitely beyond their Constitutional authority and seek recovery of funds from all who have taken payments as they in essence stole the money. Constitutionally, they are entitled to payment (Article I Section 6) for their service but there is not provision for them to continue to receive payments when not in office, i. e., no longer serving. This system is nothing short of a criminal embezzlement scheme they established for their personal benefit and gain.