Saturday, May 30, 2009

Real Tax Reform

Real Tax Reform is the one issue that FairTax "HAWKERS" don't address when they are giving their sales pitch. I've talked to a few of these people who are trying very hard here in Michigan to convince us to divert our attention from the fact that the government spends why to much money and spends it on things that violate our right to Freedom of Choice to practice our Faith, and enjoy our Liberties.

FairTax "HAWKERS" remind me of the sales people who sell Time Share. You know, the kind of sales person that once they get you there, they won't let you go until you buy SOMETHING? So, my response to Clay Pigeon is, why not real tax reform, instead of just changing the way the government takes the same amount or more?

Clay Pigeon has left a new comment on your post "There Is Still No Such Thing As a Fair Tax":

Unfortunately positions harden and there isn't much that can be said to change people's minds. As for me, I've read both books, The Fair Tax, and The Fair Tax: Answers to the Critics by G-7 Rep. John Linder and Neal Boortz. I find their arguments compelling and the research done prior to the recommendation of the Fair Tax to be comprehensive. The present Income Tax legislation takes up over 60,000 pages. Its time to abolish the Income Tax and start fresh. In my opinion the Fair Tax is the way to go. That's my personal opinion.

Real Tax Reform
Mises Daily by Laurence M. Vance | Posted on 4/16/2007 12:00:00 AM

Individual income taxes could painlessly be eliminated if federal spending was simply reduced to about the level it was at the beginning of the previous administration. Unfortunately, however, no recent tax reform proposal even addresses the issue of giving the federal government less money to spend.

"All revenue-neutral tax reform proposals allow Congress to maintain its spending orgy while appearing to lower taxes."

The concept of "revenue neutrality" is one that all advocates of liberty and limited government should be suspicious of. All revenue-neutral tax reform proposals allow Congress to maintain its spending orgy while appearing to lower taxes. The federal government is always the winner under any tax reform plan that is revenue neutral. These proposals merely shift the debate from how much wealth the federal government confiscates from its citizens to the manner in which it is done. The real problem is the bloated, profligate monstrosity that the federal government has become.

We just believe that a tax plan that perpetuates the welfare state and pays for the warfare state is not the solution. Obviously, the "best" tax reform plan, from the standpoint of liberty and less government, would be to eliminate taxes entirely. None of us are naïve enough to think that will ever happen as long as we have the state to deal with. However, in the mean time, the next best type of tax reform is one that results in a substantial lowering of the amount of taxes collected. If taxes are cut by a large enough amount, then no one will be too concerned about how the government collects its taxes. Real tax reform begins with the drastic reduction of taxes and tax rates.

Critics of real tax reform (those who espouse "revenue neutral" tax reform plans) have been quick to criticize the rest of us because (so they say) all we do is shoot down their tax reform proposals and never offer any of our own. Therefore, as a first step toward real tax reform, I would like to show, in very simple terms, how individual income taxes could painlessly be eliminated: reduce federal spending to the level it was at the beginning of the previous administration.

At the beginning of this article I said that the total revenue of the federal government during its most recently completely fiscal year was $2.406 trillion and that individual income taxes collected during this period were $1.043 trillion. This means that if you subtract the income taxes collected from total revenue you end up with $1.363 trillion for the federal government to spend. That is just a little less than the government spent during the fiscal year in which Clinton began his first term.

Are income taxes evil? Yes. Should they be eliminated? Yes. Would it be a terrible thing if the federal government still spent over $1 trillion? Yes. But it is a start. It is real tax reform. With no income tax, there will be no capital gains tax, no withholding tax, no EITC welfare program, and no refundable child credit welfare program — all without a NRST. FULL ARTICLE.

Before we can accomplish anything, we need people to start doing their own research on these subjects instead of listening to those who's JOB it is to sell it to you.

A good place to start is by understanding the mind control that has been taking place in our schools as well as our communities since the 1960's.

Time Out Productions Interviews Charlotte Iserbyt

Time Out Productions interviews former senior policy advisor on education to President Reagan, Charlotte Iserbyt.

In the interview, she speaks on her whistle blowing over the years at various levels of the US government.

Her two websites are and


Anonymous said...

Sensible, rational people (like me, and UNlike you), understand that FairTax is but the first step to restore limited government. Once we've restored our rights under the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments - by ridding ourselves of income tax code administration and enforcement - then we can move on to spending.

Unfortunately, people like you do a DIS-service by demanding either redress of grievance (which ain't happenin'), or elimination of the income tax completely (they tried that in Mass. - can't happen), or you demand retribution against theIRS - ALL rather than getting behind something that's picking up momentum from the "everyman" - a rational, logical reform such as is represented by the FairTax.

Please: Get UNSTUCK from your "vengeful rut."

Rose said...

Wow Ian, did i strike a nerve here? I am "UNSTUCK" but I really can't grab ahold of your rational, if you want to call it that.

I'm sorry that you supported Huckabee and buy into "OH, WE CAN'T LAY OFF ANY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES" Oh, we can't make government employees pay 50% of their health care instead of 10%" Oh, we can't make government employees pay 100% of their pension.

Get real here Ian. If private companies have to cut back, than so do our employees, you know Ian, GOVERNMENT WORKERS!

Get a life and go back to your whole where ever that is.