patrick.net

I'd like to see import duties replace personal income tax, as the founding fathers intended.

Let's make it happen.

Democrats would never let this happen. They love big government institutions.

I'm sure Republicans have controlled congress more than once since 1913, yet both criminal institutions are still in place. If this is ever to become reality, you gotta stuff that partisan BS in a sock, then add some padlocks, and use it to beat all bankers on site.

NuttBoxer says

I'm sure Republicans have controlled congress more than once since 1913

True, but this was introduced by the House GOP.

The Fed is the Dems friend since it became Trump's enemy so this will be tough

Sure we would have great army, police, justice, etc... without taxes.

Heraclitusstudent says

Sure we would have great army, police, justice, etc... without taxes.

You can abolish the Fed and IRS (by 80+%) and just have a lower flat tax.

A flat lower tax is still a tax, has to be collected, enforced i.e. audits, etc...
Not sure how this is possible without IRS or equivalent.
Plus I don't see why it is better.

Heraclitusstudent says

Plus I don't see why it is better

more difficult to create loopholes perhaps? Now a rich person will stash money in Bahamas and avoid paying taxes. Although if banksters put their minds to it, I am sure they will figure out a way how to game the new system also.
WRT to Fed, it seems that abolishing them would not be a problem, as it appears that their main purpose is to please banksters anyways.

Heraclitusstudent says

Sure we would have great army, police, justice, etc... without taxes.

The import duties I mentioned above are a tax. Just a consumption tax instead if an income tax, as the founding fathers intended. A national sales tax instead of income tax would be an improvement as well. Way fairer and easier to enforce as well.

Perferct timing: right after fucking donkeys took the fucking House. What a fucking joke.

Heraclitusstudent says

A flat lower tax is still a tax, has to be collected, enforced i.e. audits, etc...
Not sure how this is possible without IRS or equivalent.
Plus I don't see why it is better.

It would take 10% of the current staff to check and enforce due to its simplicity (all loopholes and special deductions removed). Simply send a standard letter with the check you owe, which can be calculated within minutes. Better because lower and lots of money saved which will go back into the private sector economy.

Heraclitusstudent says

Sure we would have great army, police, justice, etc... without taxes.

We founded this country without a standing army, so not a valid reason.
Police should never be federally funded, always locally in order to increase accountability, not a valid reason. Same for courts.

Look at the taxes we take in versus the interest on the national debt, that kind of eats it all up, and without Federal Reserve, no national debt, so you're actually advocating for a system that prevents the beneficial use of taxes.

And lastly, and MOST importantly, who do you trust as more fiscally responsible, the federal government, or yourself?

TrumpingTits says

This is called 'a cynical ploy'. This is a vote that they know doesn't have a chance in passing. REAL brave of them, eh?

But when the GOP has the majority, what happens? Do these types of bills even make it on the House floor?

Ditto with the Dems. They pull the same crap. And it happens in the Senate, too.

I think when Ron Paul was still around one did make it to the Senate. Not the first time this type of bill has been brought up.

Heraclitusstudent says

A flat lower tax is still a tax, has to be collected, enforced i.e. audits, etc...
Not sure how this is possible without IRS or equivalent.
Plus I don't see why it is better.

I agree that you'll still need enforcement. The benefit is that the simplification makes enforcement easier. I would hope that in addition to a flat rate, there would be no deductions. At that point, you're just paying a certain % of each and every dollar earned.
• Each employer withholds exactly the correct amount from each paycheck. A sudden bonus doesn't disrupt the tax amount — the employer withholds for that too. At the end of the year, you owe the IRS nothing and the IRS owes you nothing.
• Your stock broker withholds exactly the correct amount from each dividend payment and each capital gain.
• Capital losses would at least be easier, as they could be offset with short or long term gains or dividends or your regular salary. Maybe the IRS just sends you a check at the end of the year for your losses.
• Sure, there would be other potential complications, but none would be more complicated than our current system.

As for "better":
• It's "fair" for one definition of "fair." For example: a 20% flat tax means that everyone contributes one work day out of the (5 day) week to the government. Under current system, different people contribute vastly different amounts of their time/effort/work.
• It'll be easier to administer; therefore, less cheating.
• It'll be easier to understand; therefore, everyone can see they are in the same boat. Therefore, less jealousy and less special-interest problems.
• Less behavior distortion: No contortions to categorize income in various different ways, since everything is taxed at the same rate.
• Less behavior distortion: For example, no need to sell-off stocks at the end of the year only to buy alternates or wait a month and buy the originals back.
• With everyone facing the same rate, there will be more cohesion about taxes, since you won't have a whole bunch of voters who don't care about the tax rate — as long as their rate is zero.
• A flat rate with no exemptions means you get rid of the people complaining about the "marriage penalty" and the unmarried people complaining about the "marriage bonus."

SunnyvaleCA says

Heraclitusstudent says

A flat lower tax is still a tax, has to be collected, enforced i.e. audits, etc...
Not sure how this is possible without IRS or equivalent.
Plus I don't see why it is better.

I agree that you'll still need enforcement. The benefit is that the simplification makes enforcement easier. I would hope that in addition to a flat rate, there would be no deductions. At that point, you're just paying a certain % of each and every dollar earned.
• Each employer withholds exactly the correct amount from each paycheck. A sudden bonus doesn't disrupt the tax amount — the employer withholds for that too. At the end of the year, you owe the IRS nothing and the IRS owes you nothing.
• Your stock broker withholds exactly the correct amount from each dividend payment and each capital gain.
• Capital losses would at least be easier, as they could be offset with shor...

Disagree that this system you mention would be better. Making all of those institutions "withholding police" would cause their costs of compliance to skyrocket, essentially costing the taxpayer more. Make it the taxpayer's responsibility to make proper payments when taxes are due, completely ELIMINATE withholding, as that is a bunch of horse shit as it is the taxpayer's responsibility to pay the appropriate tax. It would necessarily make the taxpayers more cognizant of JUST HOW MUCH of a FUCKING they are getting when the THIEVES come at them with the tax bill. IT IS NECESSARY to start a meaningful movement to wake up the populace as to how much our overlords are OVERSPENDING and how much we are being OVERTAXED!

Employers already withhold a shitload of taxes. The equipment and programs are in place.
What would cause it to skyrocket? It's all computer driven anyway.
ForcedTQ says

Making all of those institutions "withholding police" would cause their costs of compliance to skyrocket, essentially costing the taxpayer more.