Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Question to Ricochet: Is this a brilliant idea or what?
In Southern California for the Pacific Research Institute’s annual Baroness Margaret Thatcher Orange County Dinner last night, I had lunch shortly after landing with a veteran of political communications in this state.
Over our meal, he began to go on in the manner all of us go on about the cluelessness of Republicans in Washington. “In the course of one month,” he said, “Bengazi, the IRS scandal, and the tapping of the Associated Press all broke — and the GOP couldn’t do a thing with it.” I just listened. I thought he was being a bit harsh, but we all need to get these frustrations out now and again.
Then he said something that made me sit up, take note and, now, write this post.
“The GOP,” he continued, “should come out for a flat tax and announce that, thanks to all the administrative savings from so vastly simplifying the tax code, we’ll lay off half the IRS. Get rid of all those agents they hired for Obamacare and many more. Americans hate the IRS. The complexity of the tax code is a big reason for the agency’s corruption. And you get a tax code that is friendly to economic growth to boot. Tie the two issues — stagnation and corruption — together.”
“What a brilliant reframing of the discussion,” I thought. “And where better to test it out than Ricochet.”
So here is my question: What do you think?
Published in General
So, if the rate stayed flat for, say, two presidential cycles that wouldn’t be a success—be better than what we’ve got now? I think it would . . . also think it would be longer than two cycles. But even if it was just one, it would change the debate and have a positive effect on much that’s wrong with current partisan politics.
What’s to say we can’t amend the 16th Amendment and mandate a flat rate?
The argument from perfection is an argument to never do anything, which brings joy to those vested in the status quo.
That Congress and the President selectively work on issues that benefit them politically and personally tells you all you need to know about what’s gone horribly wrong. The whole enterprise needs a reboot, an overhaul, a cleansing.
But I don’t think we’re going to get it. We’re just going to continue to get it, in a rude and painful way, until we decide to fight back.
All true and well said.
Federalism is failing. The Republic is imperiled. The government has been captured by a political class of self-interested careerists and wild-eyed, implacable Leftists.
Fighting back starts here: http://conventionofstates.com/
there will never be a flat tax. too many jobs rely on it. KPMG and all the law firms with their high paying tax lawyers are not going to allow that. there are all sorts of reasons for the complications.
better to focus on how to have tax rebates for families and their children. that will get the middle class behind you and the lawyers and accountants will like it too.
And there will never be nationalized health care.
And there will never be a national income tax.
And there will never be direct election of Senators.
And women will never have the vote.
And same sex marriage is impossible ‘cuz DOMA was bipartisan.
And gays will never openly serve in the military.
And Jim Crow will never end ‘cuz of States Rights.
And the Soviet Union is a permanent feature of the international community.
And the Berlin Wall is here to stay.
And an Alinskyite community organizer will never get elected President. Twice.
I agree that the case should be made for a flat rate of tax and retrenchment at the IRS. It would clearly unleash very significant economic growth and improve the lot of everyone (except perhaps the most egregious rent-seekers under the current ‘progressive’ tax system). It could also be good politics, especially in view of the extensive IRS corruption which has been exposed in recent times. In principle, however, income tax is an immoral tax, whatever the system of rates; it constitutes a pre-emptive call on the citizen’s means of livelihood, which can be legally avoided only if the citizen reduces himself to penury.
I’m sure that’s fine if they actually implement it. But I’d rather see the Republicans just start saying the EXACT SAME THINGS Dems are saying because that just works better. Example of an LBJ quote kicking of the War on Poverty:
“Unfortunately, many Americans live on the outskirts of hope — some because of their poverty, and some because of their color, and all too many because of both. Our task is to help replace their despair with opportunity.”
He added: “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America. I urge this Congress and all Americans to join with me in that effort.”
So just use that language and then say that because of that we are proposing a Flat Tax which will bring in more money and be fairer… yadda yadda. You can do this with almost anything they say. If you have any more quotes that work, paste them in.
Yes, a wonderful selling point that not even the RNC could screw up. ·March 8, 2014 at 8:07am
Never underestimate the ability of the RNC to screw up a message.
GOP: Flat tax! Abolish the IRS!
Dems: Government is the name for the thing we all do together. Government helps the poor and downtrodden. You want to abolish the IRS because you hate black people. You hate women. You hate gays (but are secretly gay youself). You hate latinos. You hate blacks. Did I mention that already? Well, tough, you hate blacks so much I had to mention it twice. You want to help the greedy 1% rich white male Christian homophobes. You right wingers hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate. (media repeats ad nauseum…)
GOP: Not true! We love everyone. We will prove it. Lets raise taxes. Please don’t hate us….waaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh!
I totally agree.
I live in Hong Kong, and the tax system here works. My taxes are done online, and take about five minutes.
A ‘flat tax’ doesn’t have to be absolute: Hong Kong’s system allows mortgage interest and charitable-giving deductions, within limits, and the percentage you pay is tiered according to income levels. (Note: I am also a Hugh Hewitt listener, and agree he’s over the top in his comments on the mortgage interest deduction. There are significant limits here in HK on how much you can claim, and it doesn’t slow the property market one bit.)
I also am afraid Stephen has a point. There’s increasing pressure here on the government to fund special interests, social welfare schemes, etc. I doubt our flat tax could survive all-out politicized budgeting.
(Channeling John Belushi in Aminal House)
I also am afraid Stephen has a point. There’s increasing pressure here on the government to fund special interests, social welfare schemes, etc.
Yes, but that’s true regardless of the taxation scheme. Pressure to expand government results from the ease with which politicians can buy votes with give-aways to low information voters, especially if all you have to do is print money. When your currency is the global reserve currency, you can print gargantuan sums of money (until one day you suddenly cannot, but that’s for another thread). All this is why you need to repeal or amend the 16th Amendment, so the politicos can’t have both a progressive income tax and a national sales tax. If they get that, it’s game over. We’re on the brink of it now. With this much red ink, fiscal pressure is going to explode the ‘revenue stream’ available to the Feds and something will have to increase Uncle Sam’s ability to confiscate private wealth. If you don’t think Obama understands this, you haven’t been paying attention. The GOP leadership is complicit in all this.
Incrementalism is the issue here. Say we had a flat tax of some kind tomorrow. Inevitably a politician will start suggesting we do “X” to help a constituency, a policy position, a something. If it sells, it votes, and the tax code gets amended.
Let’s think about this: The head of the agency that has the legal right to confiscate your earnings declines to testify to Congress on the grounds she might self-incriminate. If that doesn’t call for the tar and feathers to get pulled out of the revolutionary archives, I’m not sure what does.
Why do we sit and suck on it like this? Because it happens slowly, incrementally, like barnacles growing on the hull of a ship. Or as Bill Whittle put it a while ago, it’s the boiling frogs syndrome.
“Unfortunately, many Americans live on the outskirts of hope — some because of their poverty, and some because of their color, and all too many because of both. Our task is to help replace their despair with opportunity.”
He added: “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America. I urge this Congress and all Americans to join with me in that effort.”
So just use that language and then say that because of that we are proposing a Flat Taxwhich will bring in more money and be fairer… yadda yadda. You can do this with almost anything they say. If you have any more quotes that work, paste them in.
This is the way.
Let’s think about this: The head of the agency that has the legal right to confiscate your earnings declines to testify to Congress on the grounds she might self-incriminate. If that doesn’t call for the tar and feathers to get pulled out of the revolutionary archives, I’m not sure what does.
Why do we sit and suck on it like this? Because it happens slowly, incrementally, like barnacles growing on the hull of a ship. Or as Bill Whittle put it a while ago, it’s the boiling frogs syndrome.
Sadly, it will probably take financial collapse to wake up enough Americans. But that’s no reason to stop struggling against the tide of Statist authoritarianism.
We have to try to close off as many options to the Statists as possible. Fundamental political reforms are essential. (Term limits are one example.) This requires amending the constitution.
http://conventionofstates.com/