Today I'm describing how to put liberty first in consideration of the consequences of popular tax reform proposals. by Jahfre Fire Eater
(libertarian)
Sunday, April 17, 2011
If you are the sort who interprets any criticism of an idea to be a defacto support of another idea or the status quo you can stop reading already. Although that is not what this article is about, its points will certainly be lost on you. Save yourself the time and just leave a comment about what a moron I am for supporting the current tax system.
For the rest, enjoy!
The problem with tax reform proposals like the flat tax or the fair tax is that they cede authority to the government for specific portions of an individual's productivity. "But at a lower rate." comes the rallying cry of the supporters of these proposals. If the only debate is over what rate this extortion is to take place, for now, then the battle is lost. Once the baseline is established the rate will only increase as more spending creates more "need."
"We all get what's coming whether we deserve it or not." ~Bill Bonner
Here is a simple test if you dare: Suppose I am a person who has never paid more than 8% of my productivity in taxes to a government. By what authority can you force me to pay more? Why 10%? Does it require less immoral force to extort only 2% more from me than say, and additional 5%? In my critique the number is irrelevant; I focus attention on the number to highlight its arbitrary defenseless value. The morals behind granting government the authority to pick a number is where my criticism lies.
I make no defense of our tax system today. Today, the tax laws are horrible, stifling, immoral, etc.
My criticism is based on the relative moral impact on liberty required by several popular tax reform proposals.
Today the income tax game is played like this: Here are all the rules. Your objective is to find the way to pay the least amount of taxes allowed under these rules. If you find a way to pay zero taxes or never more than 8% then good for you. That is your choice under this system. Good Luck.
Under the flat or fair taxes there is no choice. Some baseline percentage is chosen by people who supposedly know just how much tax is the right amount. That sounds like no liberty at all to me. Once that baseline is set the game changes. Now the rules are that you pay the chosen amount or suffer under the force of law. If the amount goes up, you pay more. You have no choices; no options for influencing your oppression.
These proposals are carefully veiled progressive strategies for removing the obstacles in their way. One big obstacle for progressive centralization is the notion that the government is an instrument of the people. Progressives need people to accept their being subjects of the central government. Until this happens their plans cannot succeed. Enter the useful idiots. Now the stage is set for the next election.
These kinds of tax reform proposals move us away from the notions of individual liberty and into the acceptance of a hive mentality. They are aimed at getting the people to accept being subjects of the government's will and hungers.
Take this already horrifying rationale out of the abstract and consider your own fingers. If you had to choose between a system where you were free to prevent the loss of any fingers by your own choices and behavior or a system where you must lose one finger no matter what you do, which would you prefer?
What? You say you're already losing 3 fingers under the present system? Ahh...now we're getting to the crux of the issue. You think the government should impose "fairness" by eliminating individual autonomy in determining their payments.
I ask, "Do the negative consequences of your behavior justify your forcing to lose fingers those who would otherwise keep them?"
An honest answer to this question from any supporter of these progressive tax reform proposals will reveal quickly who is on the side of liberty and who is on the side of the state. Then the only question is, Why?
When it comes to Rand Paul never forget: The son is NOT the father. If you aren't too sensitive to risk having your bubble burst check out Ron Paul's take on these tax reform proposals.
In the final analysis any energy spent trying to craft a new way to extort income from citizens is a distraction from the reality that our spending is the problem. Unless a limited government, fiscally responsible congress is elected the tax burden for individuals can only increase over the long run. Attempts to deal with the tax collection before dealing with the spending are purely political strategies, not serious behavior aimed at long-term sustain-ability.
Don't let these progressive schemes distract you from the #1 priority, eliminating the big spending GOP members of Congress. That is JOB ONE for constructive political activists. If you aren't focused on that I'm sure the defenders of the status quo will thank you in the end.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Jahfre Fire Eater only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Jahfre Fire Eater is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
A number of very good points in your article, Jahfre. Good job. I have only one very minor point of disagreement, and it has to do with your last paragraph.
The #1 priority must be to change the monetary system so that people can use money whose supply remains relatively unchanged and to outlaw bank practices of lending money that doesn't belong to them while promising to return it to the depositors on demand, thereby increasing the money supply with every deposit. The power to create money out of thin air, combined with the banks ability to legally defraud their depositors, is what fuels the entire, corrupt political-economy. This would provide nearly instant (very rapid) economic recovery combined with a previously non-existent barrier to increased spending and fraudulent behavior. Change those two factors, and the rest of the problems will change by necessity, with no intervention needed by any of us.
Posted By: Mr. Peabody
Date: April 18, 2011 09:12:55 AM
The FairTax gives people more control over what they pay, not less. Example: Buy a new car --pay tax. Buy a one year old car...no tax. The Fair tax is only applied once to any object. If you buy that Cadillac, you'll pay more than if you buy the less expensive Chevy.
The Fairtax take power from the politicians and returns it to the people. No longer will pols be able to sell tax-favored status to their favorite groups. Everyone will be taxed the same, and all transactions will be taxed. No particular group will be favored with non-taxable status.
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: January 5, 2012 12:14:37 PM
Walt,
There is no way to change the monetary system unless the defenders of the corrupt status quo in congress are replaced. Those who have made their careers and built their status on the current system cannot be evangelized, they must be replaced. I agree with your point ... it just can't be accomplished by skipping part about overturning the corrupt congress and replacing them with limited government conservatives.
Mr. Peabody, your rationalization is ridiculous. It is NEVER the case that removing options is returning power to individuals. What I see is that you want government to make sure the options you approve are the only options allowed.
