Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
I don't know kane.
I just think that a LOT of people (tens of millions...maybe a couple of hundred million) in the U.S. would view govt. differently if they actually had to write that check each quarter.
As far as ending up in debt to the IRS... I suspect that neither govt. or taxes would be allowed to be the size they are now IF people had to actually write that check.
I believe that our local, state, and federal govt's could do all the infrastructure and all of the actual things that our society NEEDS it's govt. to do without needing to spend 11 BILLION dollars every day.
And if people had to write that check, I'm just saying I'm going to guess that politicians would have to change their song and dance or be voted out.
That's why I don't think people would end up in debt to the IRS. I believe that the tax rate would go WAY down.
Maybe even a national sales tax.
Don't forget that an income tax was illegal and unconstitutional up until the early 1900's (with the exception of the civil war).
Congress MADE it a part of the constitution (convenient for them).
But it was never needed to just run the country.
It's needed now to make billionaires out of defense contractors and millionaires out of politicians and their cronies.
|
It's possible, but here are the roadblocks I see.
Let's say that this law went into effect today. Great. Everyone will now be writing checks to the IRS and most of them are going to be pissed about it. Best case scenario is that in 2016 there are enough candidates running who are dedicated to cutting taxes who are actually electable that they can get into power and make a difference.
Then reality sets in. The pure fact of the matter is that there can be no significant tax cuts without major cuts to defense spending and potentially social security/medicare/entitlements. Once that reality sets in many people will oppose them. There is a segment of the population who will never vote for someone who is going to cut defense spending and there is also a segment that will never vote for someone who is going to cut social security/entitlement spending. This creates a problem with getting enough anti-tax candidates into power to make a difference.
However, still, best case scenario, these people get elected an somewhere in 2017 we start seeing some tax cuts. More likely it will take at least two election cycles to get enough people in power to make these cuts and as I said before once the reality of these cuts come into play I think a lot of people would actually vote against the people who would make them.
During this 2-4 year period millions are now going into debt with the IRS.
So 4 years from now an election is held and people suddenly have a choice. Vote for the guy who will make the tough cuts and will cut taxes so you don't have to pay very much in those checks you write or vote for the guy who will promise to just stop the check writing and help you pay for the debt and problems you have. And we find ourselves back to square one again.
I guess what I am getting at is that I don't see this country as having the desire or fortitude to do what it would really take to cut taxes enough that it would make a major change in people's lives. Because of this doing drastic things in an effort to force people to force the leadership into cutting taxes is only going to create more problems than it solves.
Just my 2 cents . . . I guess I am a pessimist.