Wednesday, April 16, 2014

A Flat Response

I've been asked why I don't write something in support of flat tax proposals.  Here's what I replied:
I try to stay within the basic confines of the gun issue even though so many other areas cry out--RKBA just seems the best place to apply my energies, plus I don't have a forum for essays outside of that. In re a flat tax, without forcing the govt back into proper Constitutional restraints, that won't stanch the spending and borrowing, it will simply change which pocket they get their plunder from, and I don't believe it would be possible politically to enact without carving out means-based exemptions to ensure Democrat dependency reigns supreme--and to continue bleeding the productive.  I would actually prefer the feds having to go to the states for funds based on apportionment, which would certainly cause some to challenge, withhold, sue, delay, rebel, and explore what they can do cheaper for themselves or do away with altogether--that along with returning appointments of senators to state legislatures to get rid of urban domination and give us a more direct and effective way of extracting revenge for bad confirmation votes would be two reforms I'd like to be able to wave my magic wand to enact.
That along with enforcing "shall not be infringed"...

2 comments:

  1. Unless and until the 16th Amendment is repealed, NO FLAT TAX - they'd simply add it to what we're paying now. Problem is, to repeal the 16th requires a Constitutional convention where the entire body of the constitution is up for revision. Does ANYBODY want the likes of Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer, et.al.changing the Constitution?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Like Ron Paul said in response to foxnews asking him in a debate what he thinks of 40% of Americans not paying an income tax, that is a good start - but let's make it 100%!

    ReplyDelete

Keep it on topic. Submit tips on different topics via left sidebar Contact Form.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.