Replies

It's almost frightening just how pervasive the current tax code has become in our daily lives. It's gotten so big that a large part of the electorate treats it like a beaten wife treats her husband. It robs, abuses, and oppresses them at every turn, and yet it is all they know, so they're too afraid to get rid of it for something else.

This is why the top candidates distance themselves from the FairTax. They are too timid to force the voters to face the fears that will go with any radical tax reform proposal. That would require something called "leadership", and I guess we just can't expect that out of our Presidential candidates anymore.

I'm not saying they have to push my preferred proposal, the FairTax, though I would certainly rather they did. The problem is that none of the candidates with a serious chance of being nominated propose any real, specific tax reform. Giuliani and Romney just want to tinker with the current code, get rid of a couple taxes, and lower some marginal rates. McCain claims to be in favor of tax reform, and even said he would sign the FairTax into law, but he couches his support in such vague terms as "anything that would simplify our tax code", and "a flatter and fairer tax", that he really isn't taking a position at all. Even Fred Thompson, my preferred "candidate", is hedging his bets. If he really was answering the FairTax guy in that video, then that's good news, but he's going to have to do better than two words in a flesh-pressing session if he wants to run on tax reform.

And that's really the problem, isn't it? Politicians have become so emasculated by "triangulation" and sound bite politics that they're completely unwilling to tackle such an obvious problem as that monstrosity known as the U.S. Tax Code. The President is supposed to be Leader of the Free World, not Follower of the Fifty-One Percent.

Thanks for your thoughtful post Pack Knight.

I agree with your assertion that front runners are afraid to provide leadership. The situation is changing however.

THe difference[s] visible in the way reform is treated; from no options available [1990?] to several options [all consumption taxes including 2 flat income tax proposals] but still not a word from a pol to two leading proposals mentioned frequently but not debated publicly [nrst hr25 and forbes flat tax] to one leading proposal [hr 25] mentioned frequently in media and by pols and debated in public frequently [but not by front runners].

THe next step will be front runners debating in public frequently instead of sidestepping an issue that requires leadership as you say.

I stand behind my statement that it isn't a matter of if, but a matter of when the nrst becomes law.

We will be forced to expand the base due to entitlement growth. THe sooner we pass the nrst, the better - as it will apply serious brakes to growth of taxation.