Reshaping the Tax Code, I'm Not Sure Americans Can Afford Any More Help
Posted: Wednesday, December 15, 2010
by David Levitt
My response to the Presidents announcement that he is considering reshaping the tax code to simplify the system and close loopholes, as reported by Jackie Calmes of the New York Times, is tepid at best and absolute horror at worst. As with health care reform and the new tax deal with Congressional Republicans, I'm not sure Americans can afford any more help.
The simple fact of the matter is that whatever comes of the deliberations, the final product will be anything but simple. There are just too many fortunes to be earned, and too many bridges to be burned, to consider damaging the integrity of this maniacal masturbation. For us to go to bed at night not having to be concerned with which pocket Uncle Sam is going to pop out of in the morning is simply not an option.
Options, get it? Like "public options," you've heard of that before right? Like the kind that would have allowed Americans to pay one sum for their health care, without the complexity of whether the hospital or doctor accepted you, how much your deductible, co-pay, co-insurance, or whether your procedure was covered or not, option. These terms are banned from the public discourse, simply not American.
No, if there is an extra buck to be made at you're expense, we are going to by God find a way to get it, that adds to our profits. "Profit," now there is a totally acceptable term, especially if it is accompanied by the terms "more than thought humanly possible." Ahh, makes my heart flutter with anticipation, but I have to be careful, there is no public option.
A value added tax (VAT), one that would totally eliminate taxes on income by either individuals or corporations, and put the burden on what we extract from our society, get rid of tax forms, take the option of social engineering out of the politicians hands, I guess sometimes "option" is ok:-), and eliminate the need for lobbyists bribes to gain favor. Shhh, it isn't being discussed, too simple.
To pay taxes only on what you choose to consume, instead of how much you make, is the only fair way to tax your citizens. You buy a bicycle you pay a little. You buy a yacht to ride that bicycle on, you pay a lot. Then the only thing that has to be decided is what won't be taxed, like food, I think we could all agree on that right? See how simple. Best of all, the IRS is out of your life FOREVER.
So this probably will never be discussed because of all the benefits our representatives glean in the aforementioned discussion. Although I'm sure their intentions are pure, because they always have our best interests at heart, I'm a little concerned about hearing our government is talking about reshaping the tax code, because I'm not sure Americans can afford any more help.
If you'd like to read more about how this discussion evolved please visit my article entitled "In Usual Bipartisan Fashion They Settled Somewhere In the Middle" at my blog at socialinjustices.net.
This Article has been viewed 1,446 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (5 total)David, I don't quite understand why you're dismissing Obama's attempts to make a change for the better? Isn't it better to start somewhere? Why is everybody gunning for Obama? I don't get it.Jennifer I'm not gunning for Obama. You've got to understand that there is only so much Obama can do. That is why even though his health bill attempts were coming from his heart, his pocketbook and those that control it have the last say. I go into how they have to start somewhere in my article on my blog, but in the end we are going to get what the wealthiest 10% that control 90% of the wealth want us to have, no more, no less. Thanks for contributing.I knew I hadn't understood properly! I agree, he's hampered. And I also agree about the wealth distribution.
Those of us who can make sense of what these politicians are doing in Washington are a little sick.Ya, I'm a little surprised when I talk to my friends both on the left and the right how often I'm hearing references about 1776. They just think were stupid, I really hope they don't have to find out the hard way that they are wrong. Thanks David.
"There are just too many fortunes to be earned, and too many bridges to be burned, to consider damaging the integrity of this maniacal masturbation."Outstanding word craft, David. Enjoyed the read. ~mogama~Thank you Mr. Mogama, your opinion always means a lot to me. Thanks for reading and sharing.
David, great article.The problem with VAT, and we have it here in the UK (Europe has it too), is that it's just used as another way for the Government to fleece us.We also have a tax on a tax here, believe it or not!Our fuel (petrol and diesel for vehicles) carries fuel duty (another word for TAX) and guess what, they also levy VAT on top of that.I agree, pay tax on what you buy, not what you earn, at least you then have some choice over the amount of tax you pay.You're right Bill VAT isn't perfect, as they can always find a way to get an extra dime out of your pocket they're going to do it. It does make it a little simpler though to know exactly how you are getting fleeced, rather than the 4,000,000 page tax code that we now have and growing by the minute. The tax on what you consume as opposed to what you earn does give you a little more control over your personal investment in society and most importantly does away with a lot of the lobbying that corrupts our political system. Of course corporations will still be writing the laws the government votes to establish, but hey let's eliminate one form of corruption at a time is all I'm saying. Thanks for contributing.
David, boy, you nailed this right...just too much common sense to practically work in current environment.Common sense? I think that is another one that has been removed from the American vernacular Bing. Thanks for reading and the comment sir.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.