Thursday, April 30, 2009
On Fiscal Conservatism
Hardline fiscal conservatism is being watered down.
"Take a concept like “fiscal conservatism.” Let’s define it (arbitrarily) as “The State should not take from citizens more than is necessary for the maintenance of a just and moral society.”---Rick Moran, Right Wing Nut House
Yes, it is arbitrary, and it is useful to show the interpretive differences that arise. But, it isn’t anywhere close to what I define as fiscal conservatism:
1. Expenditures must not exceed revenue. When revenue falls, so must expenditures. (exception: see #5)
2. Entitlements must be capped at no more than X% of gross revenue. If gross revenue falls, so must entitlements.
3. Security, including law enforcement, HSA, and defense, must be capped at Y% of gross revenue. (see exception in 10. below)
4. No legislation can be passed unless the means for its funding are fully aired, voted upon and fully funded at the same time.
5. Deficit spending legislation must require a 2/3rds vote in both houses.
6. The current deficit must be paid off over 10 years(perhaps 20,or you name it, I can’t keep up!)by deducting the yearly payments from gross revenue available.
7. Earmarks must be outlawed, and any other devious means for dipping into the common till must also be outlawed.
8. To aid avoiding cronyism, there must be term limits for Congressmen.
9. No bill can be passed until it has been read fully by all congressmen personally, debated in both houses, and without tricky maneuvers by the party in power to avoid a floor fight.
10. Emergency spending must be legislated and passed with a 2/3rds favorable vote in both houses.
11. The President must be given a line item veto power that can only be overridden by a 3/4th majority of both houses.
12. Progressive taxation must be abolished, and a Fair Tax installed in its place, plus all other federal taxes by any name must be abolished.
13.Any excess revenue must be used to reduce the national debt.
14. No bill should be presented that exceeds Z% of gross revenue to the government, or that is projected to exceed this yearly revenue percentage in out years. (see #4,#5)
15. There must be no riders to bills that are not germane to the principal issue of that bill.
X and Y above might be established as their current value. Z might be set at .5%: the idea is to reduce the number of omnibus spending bills.
Of course, there isn’t any chance at all that these provisions would be put into law now. But some legislation that moves the mark in these fiscally conservative directions may be possible post 2010 or 2012.
Labels: Conservatism, Earmarks, Fair Tax
Monday, August 18, 2008
Unfair Taxation
Fundamental reform of our tax system is urgently needed!
We the people pay the taxes that fund the government. Corporations do not pay taxes. They collect taxes embedded in their prices from consumers and turn the money over to the government. Thus, if you raise corporate tax levels, it is the individual that pays for the raises. The idea of taxing corporations instead of individuals, thus giving people the benefit of "free" tax money from business, is erroneous (Source: Dr. Milton Friedman, to the Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform, March 31, 2005.).
The sole purpose of taxation should be to provide revenue for the operation of the government. There should be no "redistribution of wealth" function added to our tax policy, as that is pure Marxism-- a totally discredited economic and political philosophy. We have allowed this redistributionist idea to be implemented in our nation because of the penetration of liberal socialist ideas into the body politic and our legislatures. It gives unwarranted power to those in the legislature that control tax policy. The idea of redistributionism is clearly rooted in envy--envy of the Haves by the Have-nots. What a subjective way to make national policy! The progressive tax code is simply theft by the government of the rightful property of an individual--his earnings. It is theft by that amount over and above a fair percentage share per person.
The tax code is so distorted now that the top 20% of earners pay 85% of the income taxes, while 40% of the population pay either nothing at all or actually receive money! (Source: data from the Congressional Budget Office, 2005.). There is a significant possibility that the new administration will make an attempt next year to raise upper quintile individual and corporate taxes by large amounts to further their social aims, such as new entitlements, while ignoring our gigantic deficits and broken current entitlement systems. Such shortsighted tax policies are neither ethical, democratic, nor conducive to economic growth and job creation, and will send our nation along the path of leveling and increasing misery for all. We witnessed this in the Soviet Union for over 75 years. We Americans, however, should not rob the well-to-do Peter to help pay the poor and unfortunate Paul (before he hits his stride and outearns most of us!).
My vote goes for the Fair Tax approach (see www.fairtax.org), which has been demonstrated in multiple nations, including several former USSR states, to be far more attractive for all economically. Even a Flat Tax would be far preferable to the ethical morass we now have, so long as we don't end up with both a Progressive and a Flat or Fair Tax! To sort this out will require an extensive national education program and debate, followed eventually by a Constitutional Amendment. The sooner, the better!
Labels: Fair Tax, Flat Tax, Taxes
