Ron Pauls 0% income tax would create 'the most jobs in the history of the world'

[ATOMonkey]

The FT doesn't eliminate the income tax. It only hopes the income tax is eliminated and relies on the good will of congress to initiate a repeal of the 16th amendment. It also creates a huge entitlement program, in the guise of their "prebate". Add in the fact that it does nothing to actually reduce spending and income redistribution and it's a recipe for a truly distasteful meal. The 0% income tax is a far better solution. Let government downsize and leave the producers alone.

Agreed on most points. 0% tax is just a likely to happen as unicorn powered electic power generation though.

By the by...mandating states to pay a tribute wasn't a really awesome system either, and would do nothing to curb Federal spending or taxation, because there are no natural limits on it.

My plan... Repeal the 16th amendment. Repeal ALL other Federal taxes, duties, fees, etc, including tariffs.

One national sales tax with one rate for everyone.

End new enrollment in all New Deal and Great Society programs. End all prohibition.

Sit back and bask in the prosperity.

 

[I Love Bourbon]

Going back to the gold standard would totally bone anyone with any debt.

Your $100,000 mortgage that you thought was easily managable just became impossible to ever pay off.

Unless you want to re-value the currency, by doing an FDR bank holiday and taking everyone's stuff and giving them back "new" reserve notes.

Why?
And the road we're currently on is heading straight for what you say will happen if we re-adopt the gold standard, hell, it's already happening!

 

[ATOMonkey]

Why?
And the road we're currently on is heading straight for what you say will happen if we re-adopt the gold standard, hell, it's already happening!

Going back to the gold standard would mean rapid deflation.

 

[John Galt]

Let's see,

Poor folks would support the economy with all or most of their income, and pay taxes on it to boot. Rich folks would support the economy with a little of their income, and only pay taxes on that.

That sure seems fair. For the rich. Sounds like class warfare to me, with the rich winning. I find myself wondering just who's envying whom.

I think I prefer the idea of no taxes at all.

We have to have taxation, simply to fund the limited dusties of government. The Fairtax is great, as it gives people a prebate, which covers the taxation on basic goods and services. That way, nobody really pays taxes on the essentials. Right now, goods and services have an embedded tax in them to cover the production/provision expense imposed by compliance costs (SS, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment, workers comp, associated office personnel to deal with this, etc.) right now. Eliminate this imbedded expense and this would go away and would put our produced goods/services on a much better footing competing against imports. A Fairtax would also harvest all of the income taxes NOT being paid by illegal industry; drug dealers, prostitutes, etc. Pimps, ho's and pushers gots to eat and buy things! Tourism would provide a huge revenue stream, AND, it is a progressive tax (this should really turn the Libs on!), as those that buy more things (the evil "rich") would pay more taxes. The ultimate bonus is that it takes away the power from the government to pick winners and losers, which is what landed us where we (and the world) are at right now, broke.

 

[88GT]

If you want to go that way, why not a Tariff? I'm not fond of any taxes, but this type is far better (in my limited understanding of our current economic system) than a national sales or income tax.

If *I* want to go that way? Don't you think we have to? At least for starters? There is no way in hell we'll get the income tax eliminated without replacing it with something else. Even if we managed to eliminate all the other non-Constitutional spending, we'd still fall short of revenue needs because we lack the other historical income streams we used to have and have relied almost solely on income.

As for tariffs, I'm all for them. It is oft forgot in these discussions of "Oh look how much better it was back then" that the U.S. received a VAST MAJORITY of its tax income from tariffs and duties. I posted in another thread several months ago a breakdown of the relative contribution personal taxes and tariffs/duties made throughout the course of our history. The only reason personal taxes were so low in our early days is because we had alternative income streams.

Okay, I just looked for the link, hoping it was a wiki doc, and sure enough, here it is: Tariffs in United States history - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The numbers aren't adjusted for inflation so it's hard to do a full-on comparison, but the relationship between income tax and non-income tax revenue is telling enough. Someone here argued against tariffs saying they had no historical role. I pulled this article to point out that the very reason we had such economic freedom in our early days was because we relied on tariffs/duties/etc.


Tariffs are not without their disadvantages, but considering that the first rounds of taxation amounted to about a dollar per person to meet the federal budget, it only took a person about a modern work week to pay it off. The key is to rein in federal spending so that what we can reasonably collect in tariffs meets the budget requirements without creating a backlash of economic consequences in other areas.

 

[John Galt]

Going back to the gold standard would mean rapid deflation.

What else is there when everything is inflated? Why is a $20 gold piece, that used to be worth $20 (the period of 1800-1900, same worth = zero inflation. Imagine that ) now worth about $1800? Is gold that much more valuable or is the dollar worth that much less?

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson

 

[I Love Bourbon]

What else is there when everything is inflated? Why is a $20 gold piece, that used to be worth $20 (the period of 1800-1900, same worth = zero inflation. Imagine that ) now worth about $1800? Is gold that much more valuable or is the dollar worth that much less?

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson

DING DING DING folks we have a winner!

Read, re-read and re-read this post again because it's 100% correct.
If you don't understand it do some more research and read more about the Federal Reserve etc. This IS the SHTF that you're all talking about.

 

[ATOMonkey]

What else is there when everything is inflated? Why is a $20 gold piece, that used to be worth $20 (the period of 1800-1900, same worth = zero inflation. Imagine that ) now worth about $1800? Is gold that much more valuable or is the dollar worth that much less?

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson

No, I totally get it. So are you saying that we peg the dollar to whatever an ounce of gold is going for right now? That would be the FDR through Nixon "Gold Standard" which really wasn't much of a standard since the government could either mess with the price of gold, or the exchange rate between dollars and gold, as it was a fiat currency referenced to the going price of gold.

If we go back to pre-FDR gold standard, where coins were actually made out of gold, we'll have to confiscate and re-issue all of our currency, or else, everyone with debt will instantly go bankrupt. If I have to hold $100,000 worth of pre-FDR debt I am totally screwed.

We could use the English Silver Standard, which just moves all the time. One pound used to actually be worth a pound of silver sterling. Then a pound was worth 1/2 pound of silver sterling, and so on etc.

So, what rate of Au oz. / $ do we want to use? Also, will we put that into the constitution or just let someone else dicker with it later?

 

[lashicoN]

What's weird is a 0% income tax. Personally, I like things like the FAA (not TSA!), DoD, NASA and a bunch of other abbreviations. Right now, it's paying my bills.

Weird, huh? Whatever floats your boat. I think being robbed, day after day, by people who then tell you what you are and are not allowed to do is weird. I think people who defend that institution are weird, but we're all different.

If income tax was 0%, you would have some extra money in your checking. You could send a charitable check on over to FAA, DoD, and NASA. If the government kept their hands out of my pockets, I would love to give NASA some charity. I've always thought a system where we get to choose where our tax dollars go would be ideal. Don't like our police state? Direct your tax dollars elsewhere. Value exploration and the furthering of humanity? Donate 100% of your taxes this year to NASA.

Unfortunately, we can barely get people to vote every four years, let alone every year. Maybe myself and 10 other people would like to be able to direct our tax dollars, but too many people wouldn't want to be bothered with personally being involved in the direction of our country every year.

I would like 0% income tax. I'd like to live in a Constitutional Republic too. Neither are likely to happen.

 

[Bondhead88]

Going back to the gold standard would mean rapid deflation.

The only thing capable of creating deflation is the destruction (physically removing it from the market place) of currency. The same as the only thing capable of causing inflation is the creation (printing of currency). Economics 101

 

[Hiker1911]

There's a big disparity between what a candidate says will work, the process of passing laws by the House/Senate, the President's 'approval' signature, and the actual implementation, or enforcement of regulations/laws. In this case, the candidate is attempting to get people stirred up over something that Congress would not pass on a good day.

So, is he spreading fantasy, and/or telling people 'out loud' that Congress would NOT LIKELY pass a '0' tax, or approve a vast reduction in the size of Gov't? I doubt he is, and more likely he is spreading rhetoric instead of providing 'realistic or realist' follow-up comments to set the press straight (and people in general) based on his previous statements.

 

[Bondhead88]

As for character assassination, this forum is rife with it.

What's weird, is the desire to return to the gold standard. Economist, who typically never agree, unanimously agree that this is horrible idea.

Poll Results | IGM Forum

Our economy is way to advanced to retreat to this draconian method of currency. Ron Paul should stick to delivering babies.

What's weird is a 0% income tax. Personally, I like things like the FAA (not TSA!), DoD, NASA and a bunch of other abbreviations. Right now, it's paying my bills.

A lot of people want to get rid of many of these abbreviations which end up trampling our constitutional rights Like the IRS, EPA, FCC, National Labor Board, National Education System, FDA, ATF, and a whole host of other abbreviations and non abbreviations.

 

[Hiker1911]

Bondhead88, given the every day use of acronyms in the business world, abbreviations (as you call them) are not likely to disappear from popularity.

However, I agree wholeheartedly, they are overboard-ridiculous in their use!

 

[CarmelHP]

No income tax, no sales tax. Let the states figure out how to finance the federal government and how to collect it or levy an across the board duty on imports. Just leave the average citizen out of the day to day direct feeding of the federal beast.

 

[ATOMonkey]

The only thing capable of creating deflation is the destruction (physically removing it from the market place) of currency. The same as the only thing capable of causing inflation is the creation (printing of currency). Economics 101

Which is exactly what a "real (gold coins)" gold standard would do, as there is a finite amount of gold.

Anything else really isn't a "gold standard" as you can always screw around with the cost of gold, and as the value of gold goes up and down, you get a resulting inflationary and deflationary effect in the currency.

If we used gold coins as tender (or paper money with actual gold deposits) there would be a continuing deflationary effect as the production of goods and services outpaced the mining of gold.

Not a bad thing, IMO, as it would result in a yearly increase in the value of deposits, but it would RUIN credit markets.

 

[ATOMonkey]

No income tax, no sales tax. Let the states figure out how to finance the federal government and how to collect it or levy an across the board duty on imports. Just leave the average citizen out of the day to day direct feeding of the federal beast.

So, how does this limit Federal spending and/or taxation? I fail to see an upside.

 

[JettaKnight]

Bondhead88, given the every day use of acronyms in the business world, abbreviations (as you call them) are not likely to disappear from popularity.

However, I agree wholeheartedly, they are overboard-ridiculous in their use!

Acronyms are abbreviations that make a new word, like NASA. Ergo, FAA is not an acronym.

I think Bonehead is trying to argue that many gov't organizations are an unnecessarily beauracracy and should be eliminated. I'm arguing that many of them are essential in the modern world.

 

[RMOR]

Weird, huh? Whatever floats your boat. I think being robbed, day after day, by people who then tell you what you are and are not allowed to do is weird. I think people who defend that institution are weird, but we're all different.

If income tax was 0%, you would have some extra money in your checking. You could send a charitable check on over to FAA, DoD, and NASA. If the government kept their hands out of my pockets, I would love to give NASA some charity. I've always thought a system where we get to choose where our tax dollars go would be ideal. Don't like our police state? Direct your tax dollars elsewhere. Value exploration and the furthering of humanity? Donate 100% of your taxes this year to NASA.

Unfortunately, we can barely get people to vote every four years, let alone every year. Maybe myself and 10 other people would like to be able to direct our tax dollars, but too many people wouldn't want to be bothered with personally being involved in the direction of our country every year.

I would like 0% income tax. I'd like to live in a Constitutional Republic too. Neither are likely to happen.

Bingo! I agree. Wish I could have said it this well.

 

[Bondhead88]

Acronyms are abbreviations that make a new word, like NASA. Ergo, FAA is not an acronym.

I think Bonehead is trying to argue that many gov't organizations are an unnecessarily beauracracy and should be eliminated. I'm arguing that many of them are essential in the modern world.

Acronyms and initialisms are abbreviations formed from the initial components in a phrase or a word. These components may be individual letters (as in CEO) or parts of words (as in Benelux and Ameslan). There is no universal agreement on the precise definition of the various terms (see nomenclature), nor on written usage (see orthographic styling). While popular in recent English, such abbreviations have historical use in English as well as other languages. As a type of word formation process, acronyms and initialisms are viewed as a subtype of blending.


I argue they are intrusive and go directly against the constitution and founding principles of the USA. Whether they are helpful or not is irrelevant. Many a society have been enslaved through good intentions.

it is not the governments job to keep me safe it is mine. it is not the governments job to decide what is right or wrong in my personal life it is mine. Personal responsibility was one of the founding principles laid down by the forefathers.

Reliance upon the government was the farthest and last. it was supposed to be kept to a minimum. It is now a maximum.

 

[88GT]

No income tax, no sales tax. Let the states figure out how to finance the federal government and how to collect it or levy an across the board duty on imports. Just leave the average citizen out of the day to day direct feeding of the federal beast.

where do the states get the funds to finance the fed?