Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: XR7
If Gore is proposing eliminating the income tax in favor of additional gas and/or oil taxes, then I'd say that is a tradeoff worth considering. The additional savings at the household level would more than compensate for the additional taxation at the pump, there would be strong incentives to become less oil dependent, and the administration of such a tax would be far less intrusive to individual liberties.

We've been working to get rid of the income tax in favor of a VAT or flat tax. Here's an opportunity to go ahead and do something along those lines with liberal support. I say call the bluff with a concrete proposal that makes the income tax unconstitutional and increases energy taxes to a revenue neutral level. Then watch the libs weave and dodge and turn on Gore themselves.

12 posted on 09/18/2006 8:11:12 PM PDT by massadvj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: massadvj

read the fine print

Wooden Apollo wvants to ditch the social security tax,


27 posted on 09/18/2006 8:20:25 PM PDT by greasepaint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
So we dump the income tax and just tax oil/gas. What then happens when some smart guy figures out how to dramatically reduce usage? The country still needs some money for government. Where is it going to come from?
30 posted on 09/18/2006 8:21:59 PM PDT by bybybill (`IF TH E RATS WIN, WE LOSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
then I'd say that is a tradeoff worth considering.

Maybe, Only if he wasn't basing his tax on unproven, argumentably junk science.

"Global Warming" has not been proven and everytime our government passes laws to limit emissions, these repeated lies become 'fact' in the mind of the public. It is bad enough when the Liberal media does it, but it's worse when our own government gives it's affirmation.
32 posted on 09/18/2006 8:27:07 PM PDT by lmr (The answers to life don't involve complex solutions.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj

I agree. It's wrong to automatically dismiss this idea, since it clearly (from a classical economic perspective) makes more sense to tax undesirable externalities (such as pollution) than desirable activities (such as work). A tax of this sort could be harmful if it is extremely disproportionate to the damage the pollution does, but at some scale it is entirely reasonable.


45 posted on 09/18/2006 8:49:18 PM PDT by Young Scholar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj

I understand your sentiment, but it would devastate entire industries. I find it annoying that al Reuters goes along with the CO2 = pollution nonsense. It is telling the Sore Loserman acknowledges that payroll taxes result in less pay, and that energy taxes result in less energy. Seems like Republicans ought to be pointing out those admissions.


48 posted on 09/18/2006 8:56:42 PM PDT by ottothedog (Forbes 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
If Gore is proposing eliminating the income tax

From what little is disclosed in the article, it doesn't appear to me that Gore is calling for the elimination of the income tax, or necessarily even eliminating withholding of income taxes. He appears to be using the Commie formulation of "payroll taxes", primarily meaning Social Security and perhaps Medicare. When the Bush income tax cuts were voted in, the Democrats complained because nothing was being done about "payroll taxes". So, most likely this is just another Communist lie masquerading as a phony tax cut proposal...

59 posted on 09/18/2006 9:52:15 PM PDT by The Electrician ("Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
I say call the bluff with a concrete proposal that makes the income tax unconstitutional and increases energy taxes to a revenue neutral level.

Me too.

60 posted on 09/18/2006 10:43:37 PM PDT by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
If Gore is proposing eliminating the income tax in favor of additional gas and/or oil taxes, then I'd say that is a tradeoff worth considering. The additional savings at the household level would more than compensate for the additional taxation at the pump, there would be strong incentives to become less oil dependent, and the administration of such a tax would be far less intrusive to individual liberties.

What world have you been living in?  Certainly, not the one that I have lived in for the past 60 years.  You know...the one where taxes never go down and if they seemed to...they simply morphed into some other named vehicle that is still a tax.

Now, with that in mind, who do you think would pay for the "Gore Tax?"  I bet you think that it would be those nasty old companies, don't you.  Well, guess what?  You're wrong...it's you and me, along with all others who consume the goods and services of America's industry.

Any time the tainted finger of government touches any industry or business, all market forces are destroyed and the business simply changes management from the private sector to the government sector.

Like paying more taxes and higher prices for everything you will purchase?  Keep thinking that way.

To keep free, WE MUST ELIMINATE ALL BUT THE MOST BASIC TAXES needed to perform the basic functions of our original constitution. 

73 posted on 09/19/2006 5:06:56 AM PDT by DH (The government writes no bill that does not line the pockets of special interests.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: massadvj
Gore is proposing eliminating the income tax in favor of additional gas and/or oil taxes, then I'd say that is a tradeoff worth considering. The additional savings at the household level would more than compensate for the additional taxation at the pump, there would be strong incentives to become less oil dependent, and the administration of such a tax would be far less intrusive to individual liberties.

I agree with you. In my perfect world, though, I wouldn't make the tradeoff revenue neutral. I'd cut government spending a great deal so the tax on fuels wouldn't be too high.

I would cut government spending by getting rid of blatantly uncostitutional government functions and then laying off the least productive 25 percent of government employees (for starters.) I work for the Feds. I know of what I speak.

81 posted on 09/19/2006 4:37:03 PM PDT by Our man in washington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson