Proposal To End All Taxes

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by modit, Mar 31, 2011.


Can A Government Be Supported Without Tax?

  1. Yes - This Model Makes Sense

  2. No - The Tax System Since The Pharaoh Is The Only Option

  3. Yes & No - This Model Is Flawed But Can Be Improved VIA My Post

  1. modit macrumors 6502

    Apr 8, 2008
    What do you think about Government not collecting any tax? Revenue would come from natural resources companies that would be turned into Crown Corporations (only Canada might pull this off as we have one of the World's most abundant resources).

    Business profits and would rise and US and other international companies would set up shop here. Roads, courts, ect would be paid for and we would avoid the Baby Boomer dilemma by increasing productivity and innovation VIA economic immigration.

    Here's an everyday example:

    GASOLINE TAX - 33% in combined taxes on average on the price of fuel in Canada, and Americans pay about 11%.

    With Tax (Last Month Average)

    $1.21 per liter (~40 cents to Gov't)

    No Tax

    81¢ (~81 cents to Gov't)

    Can you accept the logic that resources can fund services? :D

    Again, this is just a proposal so please throw in your 2 cents (not taxed of course :p).
  2. jav6454 macrumors P6


    Nov 14, 2007
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    Been there, corruption won't let it fly this easily.

    Back in Honduras the state owns both the only Electric and Telephone (Landline) companies.

    Albeit now their are minor landline companies now, but nothing on a large scale.

    Point is, the country is still in distress even though both Government-owned companies generate massive profits. Might I add that every year tariffs keep going up on the phone side and twice a year for electric.
  3. modit thread starter macrumors 6502

    Apr 8, 2008
  4. Eraserhead macrumors G4


    Nov 3, 2005
    Sounds like a terrible idea, I highly doubt it has ever been seriously attempted.
  5. modit thread starter macrumors 6502

    Apr 8, 2008
    Help break it apart so that it can be improved :D
  6. Ugg macrumors 68000


    Apr 7, 2003
    Won't work.

    Few countries have enough resources to provide a tax base. Taxes are most efficient when spread across broad swaths of the population and businesses. By limiting taxes to a handful of items, the government would be forced to extract those resources come hell or high water. There would probably be little regard for environmental safety.
  7. iStudentUK macrumors 65816


    Mar 8, 2009
    Just can't make enough money out of it.

    Here in the UK about 75% of government income comes from- income tax, national insurance (which is also deducted from people's pay checks), VAT, council tax, alcohol duties, tobacco duties. Fuel duties account for around 5%. How can selling natural resources make up the difference?
  8. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Mar 22, 2010
    That would be my concern as well.

    Plus these natural resources are finite. Human endeavor is far less so.

    Why build your tax base on a resource that will run out?

    Then what?
  9. SuperCachetes macrumors 6502a


    Nov 28, 2010
    Away from you
    I don't think this would work in the USA, where people seem to have a distrust and low opinion of most of our governent-run businesses.

    That said, looking the Wiki link in the OP, there's a chart called "Government corporations by field and by country" towards the end of the article. Of the countries who have more state-run companies than the U.S., I have to say that most of them are very respectable and to my knowledge have a very high standard of living; i.e. Sweden, Finland, etc. Go figure.
  10. chrmjenkins macrumors 603


    Oct 29, 2007
    A resource tax would ultimately be regressive in nature as the poor have some minimum threshold of resources that they need while the rich would not see their resource needs rise proportionally with their income. Couple this with the rich having means to circumvent need for such resources (say purchasing an electric vehicle to not buy gas) and you have a system where the rich keep winning and the poor keep losing.
  11. SactoGuy18, Apr 1, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2011

    SactoGuy18 macrumors 68030


    Sep 11, 2006
    Sacramento, CA USA
    I think at least here in the USA, the better solution is to NOT tax the process of earning money (taxes on all forms of income, especially earned income from a business, wages, bank account interest, capital gains and stock dividend payments) but tax the process of consumption (buying new-production goods and services)

    This is why I am a big fan of FairTax (H.R. 25/S. 13). FairTax works like this:

    1. It eliminates all taxation as defined by the Internal Revenue Code (Title 26).
    2. Instead, we tax consumption (the buying of new goods and services) at a singular 23% rate.
    3. Used goods sales, business-to-business sales and college tuition are NOT subject to this tax.
    4. To ensure the progressive nature of this tax, every legal resident of the USA (citizens, resident aliens, aliens with valid student visas, and aliens with valid work permits) will get a monthly "prebate" payment to cover the cost of the 23% tax up to the Federally-defined poverty level.

    Under this system, we gain the following advantages:

    1. No more spending hundreds of billions of US dollars per year in income tax compliance costs (some estimate that the savings could be as much as US$270 BILLION per year!).
    2. No more having to "hide" net worth by either participating in the cash-only underground economy or funneling liquid assets to offshore financial center bank. Some economists estimate something like well over US$10 TRILLION in American-owned liquid assets are "hidden" this way--an amount that if returned to the US financial system would solve a LOT of serious financial problems now plaguing the USA.
    3. It would actually end up saving both Social Security and Medicare, since with no more taxation of bank account interest, capital gains and stock dividend payments, people can create their own monetary "nest eggs" completely tax-free for retirement and/or future medical needs, reducing the need for Social Security and Medicare.
    4. It would encourage American businesses to keep as many jobs, factories and even corporate headquarters in the USA, entice foreign companies to expand US operations, and could even make the USA the world's largest "flag of convenience" for commercial shipping.

    So what are we waiting for?
  12. Digital Skunk macrumors 604

    Digital Skunk

    Dec 23, 2006
    In my imagination
    I don't mind paying taxes, even high ones "GASP" :eek:

    Just as long as my hard earned cash can be put where I'd want to see it go. The thousands of dollars I put into Maryland and US government shouldn't be spent on wars that benefit the rich. Or R&D for a war machine that's decades ahead of the pack. Or for bailing out companies ran into the ground by rich CEOs.

    I want my money to go to my neighborhood, where children are dying every day because no one in Baltimore can understand the concept of a community center to keep kids off the street.

    In other words . . . One M1A1 Abrams tank costs $4.3 million. We had about 9000 of them. Can we just keep 8990 and use the 40 million to invest in our kids?
  13. entatlrg macrumors 68040


    Mar 2, 2009
    Waterloo & Georgian Bay, Canada
    Taxes aren't a problem. It's what's done with the money once collected that's the problem.

    Denmark for example has among the highest taxes in the world, coincidentally study after study, year after year they're known to have the happiest citizens in the world too.

    That country is a model for tax money spent right ... EVERY child gets a paid for education through University, elderly completely looked after, housing, food, medical, dental. The examples can fill a book.

    Taxes are necessary to run a Country, ending taxes is far from addressing the problem.

    The public needs to get rid of their ignorance, pay attention to who's getting into office, eliminate the corruption ... it's too far gone to be fixed because the rich and powerful have their controls in place...
  14. mcrain macrumors 68000


    Feb 8, 2002
    Taxes are a necessary component of a civilized society that chooses to have a government.

    FYI, the fair tax is anything but fair. It is highly regressive in nature.
  15. SactoGuy18 macrumors 68030


    Sep 11, 2006
    Sacramento, CA USA
    Why do you think this is part of the FairTax proposal:

    4. To ensure the progressive nature of this tax, every legal resident of the USA (citizens, resident aliens, aliens with valid student visas, and aliens with valid work permits) will get a monthly "prebate" payment to cover the cost of the 23% tax up to the Federally-defined poverty level.

    I'd recommend reading this PDF file that explains how FairTax works and why it is a great idea to help revive the US economy:
  16. mcrain, Apr 1, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2011

    mcrain macrumors 68000


    Feb 8, 2002
    Seriously, if you are going to buy the PDF from the fairtax website as neutral analysis, I hope you are not in procurement. (edit - removed the snide comment. This is a serious issue, and deserves serious response. My apologies.)

    The fair tax is regressive because, even with the prebate, lower income individuals will pay a far smaller larger (oops) percentage of their income in taxes than those who make more. That's the definition of regressive.

    Here's an analysis Fairtax doesn't like and has spent a lot of time trying to deal with. vs. Fairtax
  17. Mousse macrumors 68000


    Apr 7, 2008
    Flea Bottom, King's Landing
    [​IMG]The Government is violation of the Sherman Act. We need to break apart the Federal Government so that the smaller governments will have to compete for our taxes.:D
  18. Sydde macrumors 68020


    Aug 17, 2009
    Good idea. The best way to implement a consumption tax is via a national property tax. If you buy a thing, you own it, hence you should be taxed on it. What could be more progressive?
  19. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Mar 9, 2005
    You mean a far larger percentage of their income than those who make more?
  20. CalBoy, Apr 1, 2011
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2011

    CalBoy macrumors 604


    May 21, 2007
    A consumption tax on its own can never be sufficient to stabilize wealth distribution or help people out of poverty.

    Even with a prebate program, poorer people would be taxed at a much higher rate (in percentage terms) compared to wealthy individuals.

    Wealthy individuals tend not to purchase a great deal; most of their income goes towards reinvestment, which I presume would be immune from a consumption tax? If we were to allow this tax structure to run for several decades, we would eventually come to a distribution of wealth where almost all of the capital wealth in the country would be held by the very few and they would continue to hold a greater percentage of the wealth as each year passed.

    The only way this could hypothetically work is if investments are counted as consumption (you are "buying" a certificate, bond, or real property). The rate would have to be much higher than 23% for this to work, however. In order to prevent extreme wealth concentration, the rate for investment would have to exceed 50%.

    As for the question in this thread, a resource tax wouldn't work either. Even if we could extract a steady amount of resources forever (which we can't), as time went on our need for raw materials would approach an asymptote while our use of these resources would become more efficient. More and more of the economy would become independent of raw materials and the government would have to provide the same services while seeing a flat-lining tax base.
  21. Sydde macrumors 68020


    Aug 17, 2009
    There have been various recent proposals to tax stock trading in order to encourage long-term investment over speculation. Britain right now, if I understand correctly, taxes trading at 0.25%. I believe the estimates suggest that $150 billion a year could be harvested from this kind of tax, mostly on the large investment houses who run on computers that trade issues at millisecond speed.
  22. samiwas macrumors 68000

    Aug 26, 2006
    Atlanta, GA
    I think I could get behind that plan. But watch the "conservative" folks tell you how this will destroy the economy and hurt jobs.
  23. blueroom macrumors 603


    Feb 15, 2009
    Toronto, Canada
    Naa, I don't want to live in a cave without electricity.
  24. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Oct 14, 2010
    Taxes are never going away ... pure fantasy logic :cool:
  25. Pachang macrumors regular

    Dec 17, 2009
    Op wants the government to run natural resources companies. The guys who can't deliver mail.

Share This Page