Getting Rid of the Income Tax

This makes sense if you can back it up but...

Having troops abroad doesn't come anywhere near 1.1 TRILLION dollars (or 800 billion) a year. That $1.2T is 44% of the fed. budget. Defense spending is only 18%. And that includes ALL defense spending (not counting supplemental bills, which would tack on a FEW percent.) The actual costs of keeping troops abroad in germany/japan/korea is only a small fraction of that 18%.

Total "defense" spending in 2007 was $550 billion, or 20% of the budget. However, that doesn't include an additional $150 billion spent "off-budget" for other military purposes, which includes the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq, so true "defense" spending is closer to 25%.
 
Corporations don't pay taxes. The customers of the corporations pay for everything. Think about it.
 
I did some searching and as near as I can tell, we're spending about $300 billion/year more now than we did 10 years ago. From the data I was able to find, it's not clear to me whether these figures includes things like:

1) Veterans benefits
2) Interest on the national debt due to military spending
3) Military aid to other countries

I'm pretty sure this chart includes funding for the war [Edit: However, I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't include the cost of veterans benefits, etc., due to the war]:

us-spending-1998-2008.png


Sources:

* For data up to 2005, Chris Hellman, http://www.fcnl.org/now/pdf/2006/mar06.pdf The Runaway Military Budget: An Analysis PDF formatted document, Friends Committee on National Legislation, March 2006, no. 705, p. 3
* For 2006, 41% of Your 2006 [US] Taxes go to War http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=2336&issue_id=19, Friends Committee on National Legislation, February 15, 2007
* For 2007 and 2008, Highlights of the Fiscal Year 2007 Pentagon Spending Request http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002239.php and Highlights of the Fiscal Year 2008 Pentagon Spending Request http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002273.php, both from the Center for Arms Control and Non Proliferation.
 
Last edited:
Getting rid of the income tax and replacing it with nothing is simply not feasible.

Getting rid of the income tax it getting rid of $1.1 trillion from the Treasury.

How could we cut spending to account for such a loss of revenue? I want to see numbers please, even if they are rough.

My thinking was that you can't get rid of all the department of defense. I am not seeing where we get this $1.1 trillion cut in spending from.


You say that it is not feasible to get rid of the income tax. you are simply wrong about this sir or ma'am. This nation survived and prospered for over a 100 years without an income tax. The income tax was only added during the Wilson adminstration (Wilson in my mind was a Monster but thats another subject). Income taxes must be cut to return some of our freedoms to us that has been stolen over the past 70 years. To eliminate the income tax we must cut spending not just from the military, but from the welfare, entitlement programs, interest payment on the debt, business subsidy--no govt program should be exempted from being cut. Everything and I mean everything needs to be cut. :D

I would also like to see the corporate income tax, FICA tax, estate tax, and capital gains tax eliminated.
 
Last edited:
I did some searching and as near as I can tell, we're spending about $300 billion/year more now than we did 10 years ago. From the data I was able to find, it's not clear to me whether these figures includes things like:

1) Veterans benefits
2) Interest on the national debt due to military spending
3) Military aid to other countries

I'm pretty sure this chart includes funding for the war [Edit: However, I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't include the cost of veterans benefits, etc., due to the war]:

us-spending-1998-2008.png


Sources:

* For data up to 2005, Chris Hellman, http://www.fcnl.org/now/pdf/2006/mar06.pdf The Runaway Military Budget: An Analysis PDF formatted document, Friends Committee on National Legislation, March 2006, no. 705, p. 3
* For 2006, 41% of Your 2006 [US] Taxes go to War http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=2336&issue_id=19, Friends Committee on National Legislation, February 15, 2007
* For 2007 and 2008, Highlights of the Fiscal Year 2007 Pentagon Spending Request http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002239.php and Highlights of the Fiscal Year 2008 Pentagon Spending Request http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/archives/002273.php, both from the Center for Arms Control and Non Proliferation.

The military budget is obviously very high. We can't really get rid of it completly and it still doesn't account for the 1.1 Trillion revenue from the income tax. How much of this do we cut? Where does the rest come from!?!
 
Last edited:
You say that it is not feasible to get rid of the income tax. you are simply wrong about this sir or ma'am. This nation survived and prospered for over a 100 years without an income tax. The income tax was only added during the Wilson adminstration (Wilson in my mind was a Monster but thats another subject). Income taxes must be cut to return some of our freedoms to us that has been stolen over the past 70 years. To eliminate the income tax we must cut spending not just from the military, but from the welfare, entitlement programs, interest payment on the debt, business subsidy--no govt program should be exempted from being cut. Everything and I mean everything needs to be cut. :D

I would also like to see the corporate income tax, FICA tax, estate tax, and capital gains tax eliminated.

And what about the function these programs once served? They can't all of a sudden become irrelevant.
 
The Real US Financial Picture

Let's put this in terms most Americans probably won't understand, but it's worth a shot anyway. Lets apply our government's financial situation to a regular family household. The figures shown in this scenario are in direct proportion to the actual financial picture of the US federal govt.

THE CURRENT SITUATION

-You are a typical American family with two working parents and two kids.
-Your combined annual income is $25,600
-Your annual bills are $27,300 (a deficit of $1,700)
-Your total debt (mortgage, car loans, credit cards) is a whopping $91,000
-Your annual interest on the debt, without touching the principle, is $2,370

ELIMINATING THE PERSONAL INCOME TAX


...Mommy wants to stop working, become a stay at home mom and take care of the kids, eliminating 45% of the family income.

-Your annual income is now $14,000
-Your bills are still $27,300 a year (a deficit of $13,300)
-In order to balance your budget you will have to eliminate 48% of your bills

CUTTING GOVT SPENDING

By some miracle you are able to convince the family to tighten their belts. You move into a crummy apartment in a bad neighborhood. You eat Tom Ramen and Mac & Cheese for every meal and shop at the thrift stores for your kids clothing, and you are able to cut spending enough to achieve a balanced budget.

-You earn $14,000 per year
-You spend $14,000 per year

THE NATIONAL DEBT

Even though you have a balanced budget you still have a mountain of debt that is 6.5x your annual income! The only way to eliminate this is to start paying it down little by little.

-Your debt $91,000

SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE

In order to start paying down the debt you have to cut more spending. 70% of your expenses go to taking care of your dependents, providing food, shelter and medical care for your children and wife, so you don't dare touch this.

-$9,600 per year on your dependents
-$1,000 per year on other minimal operating expenses
-$3,400 to put toward paying off the debt each year
-At this rate the debt will be paid off in 38 years!

LETTING YOUNG PEOPLE OPT OUT

...Drastic restructuring occurs at your company and your hours are cut, eliminating 60% of your income

-You are now earning only $5,300 per year
-Your bills are $10,600 and you can't cut anything else

At this point, not only can you not continue paying on the debt, you can't even pay your bills. The only option is to BEGIN BORROWING AGAIN!

This is why our country is completely, and unequivocally F**KED financially, and nothing will ever change that. The time to fix this problem was 20 years ago, but you can't expect a culture who lives in perpetual debt in their personal lives to understand the financial ramifications of deficit spending by government. This country is headed toward bankruptcy. Hold on tight, because this plane is going to crash! You can bury your head in the sand, plug your ears and sing "la-la-la" if it makes you feel better, but the numbers don't lie. The best Ron Paul can do is put a band-aid on the situation and postpone the pain for a little longer. You can thank your parents and grandparents for their apathy and ignorance, and I'm sure our children will thank us for the tremendous burden we'll leave them, if this country even exists anymore :(

There is one way to fix this picture, but I know you guys don't want to hear it because it involves sacrifice. BIG SACRIFICE. Its not the rosy utopia painted by most libertarian idealists. It would involve RAISING TAXES and CUTTING SPENDING. The only way to get out of debt in your personal life is to increase your income and decrease your bills. The same thing is true for the govt. But I highly doubt people will get on board with that kind of plan.
 
Last edited:
And what about the function these programs once served? They can't all of a sudden become irrelevant.

Why can't they? Here are a few agnecies that could easily be cut from the federal budget.

Easy Cuts to make.

Lets take the Department of Commerce. A worthless agency if there ever was one. Why do we need to spend nearly $7 billion on that agency. The only agency within that department that is remotely constititional is the census. Even with that too much money is spent.

National Science Foundation-Another $6 billion agency that could be easily cut. Research should be carried out by the private sector.

Small Business Adminstration--This agency is nearly a $1billion. A business must raise formation capital from investors or banks to begin operation. Not the govt. If a business can't stand on its on two feet then it shouldn't exist.

Department of State--I would cut about 95% of this department's budget. In 2008 we are expected to spend $35 billion...thats b with a billion on this agency. Within this budget we are speding almost $5 billion to fund foreign militaries. We shouldn't use taxpayers money to arm any nation. We are spending nearly $2 billion on a mulitlaterial development bank (probably IMF). I can go on, but this entire budget is almost unneccassry and certainly not constitional. I would think easy to cut.
 
The bottom line is that it isn't practical. You're right about all of these programs and agencies. They just can't be shut down right away. Paul says he wants to keep the entitlement systems in place for the people that have become dependent on them, but get rid of the income tax, AND let young people get out. Somehow we're magically still supposed to pay for all of this. Someone above said he'd like to see corproate income taxes and payroll taxes gone. If you get rid of those and the personal income tax, you're left with just 7% of federal revenue from excise taxes, estate and gift taxes, customs duties, and miscellaneous receipts. Paul still wants to have a strong national defense so he wouldn't cut the whole military budget. Why doesn't Paul just say that he wants to cut taxes in half or something more realistic? Some of the things he wants to cut he can't cut by himself.
 
The only helpful thing I got from these thread was the Grace Commission. Can anyone reinforce the validity of the Grace commission?

If the Grace commission is true, then the problem has not everything to do with military spending but with waste and pork.

Yes, the Grace Commission report is true. Unfortunately, Reagan didn't pay much attention to it...

You're right, the problem is not entirely with military spending. The reason that RP talks about it in terms of bringing troops home from around the world is because as President he would have the power to do that. On the other hand, dealing with all the waste and pork spending requires Congress to get on board, too, and the odds of that happening aren't so good.

Cutting waste and pork in government isn't easy, because government agencies operate in a competition-free zone. Some might say that each government agency is a monopoly.

Let me give you an example. I went to a scientific conference recently and had a conversation with a recruiter for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). When I asked him how job security was at the NRC, he said "It's great! We haven't laid anyone off in my department since I've been working there." He'd worked for the NRC for 25 years. The problem is that the NRC, like all government agencies, does not live and die by profits and losses. They have virtually no incentive to cut costs and improve productivity. By the same token, they have no incentive to improve quality above what is passable.

Another example would be the "cost-plus" contracts given to military contractors.... the list could go on.
 
Last edited:
See me post #8.

What would these 500,000 do at home? Are there enough jobs for them? I am not trying to be aggressive I just want to understand. They would still receive a government salary but stay at home?

They could supplement the border patrol and secure our borders for one thing.
 
Take your pick of items on this page. I prefer Department of Homeland Security. $700 Billion in grants. Most of it related to FEMA - Flood Insurance. Add that to the remainder of their budget, listed under contracts and you have a good start on a trillion.

http://www.fedspending.org/faads/chart_agency.php
 
Last edited:
They could supplement the border patrol and secure our borders for one thing.

I am a retired Marine, served for 20 years. When the military is not off fighting wars we train for war. Training is less expensive than real war and a lot less casualties too.
 
Anyone been following the markets? We will slash spending because we have run out of credit. Even our T Bills are in danger of losing their triple A rating.
We are not only broke, but our credit cards are maxed out. The party's over.

We are in for third world level inflation under Bernake. We have become the Weimar Republic. We need Dr. Paul or we will get a Chancelor Hitler.
 
Here's an 8 year Budget proposal plan I put together based of the 2007 spending budget. I just did 8 year since it's two terms but this could of course be expanded out over a longer term. The point however is to show what kind of results could be had in a relatively short period of time without any instantly devastating cuts. All numbers in billions:

Reduction in Defense spending of 10.25% per year over 8 years = 450 in savings. Oh and BTW even with these savings we would still have the largest defense budget in the entire world.

Phase out below listed departments over 8 year period:

Dept of Education
Dept of Energy
Community/Regional Development
Agriculture
Transportation

Total savings: 244

Reduction of spending of 7.5% per year over 8 years for the following departments:

Savings:
Enviroment: 20
Foriegn Affairs: 19
Science and Tech: 15


Welfare: Reduce spending by 4.5% per year over 8 years.
Savings: 132

Medicaid: Reduce spending by 3% per year over 8 years.
Savings: 66

Total Government savings per year after 8 years (when compared to our current budget) = $946 Billion.

Remember the above was done without having to touch Social Security or Medicare benefits for seniors.


So now we've got $946B to play with. The first $400 Billion would take care of balancing the budget.

The next $450b would allow for a 39% reduction of the Federal income tax.

The last $100b would be surplus to pay down debt.
 
I am a retired Marine, served for 20 years. When the military is not off fighting wars we train for war. Training is less expensive than real war and a lot less casualties too.


Okay, but what's wrong with protecting our borders against intrusion?
 
Here's an 8 year Budget proposal plan I put together based of the 2007 spending budget. I just did 8 year since it's two terms but this could of course be expanded out over a longer term. The point however is to show what kind of results could be had in a relatively short period of time without any instantly devastating cuts. All numbers in billions:

Reduction in Defense spending of 10.25% per year over 8 years = 450 in savings. Oh and BTW even with these savings we would still have the largest defense budget in the entire world.

Phase out below listed departments over 8 year period:

Dept of Education
Dept of Energy
Community/Regional Development
Agriculture
Transportation

Total savings: 244

Reduction of spending of 7.5% per year over 8 years for the following departments:

Savings:
Enviroment: 20
Foriegn Affairs: 19
Science and Tech: 15


Welfare: Reduce spending by 4.5% per year over 8 years.
Savings: 132

Medicaid: Reduce spending by 3% per year over 8 years.
Savings: 66

Total Government savings per year after 8 years (when compared to our current budget) = $946 Billion.

Remember the above was done without having to touch Social Security or Medicare benefits for seniors.


So now we've got $946B to play with. The first $400 Billion would take care of balancing the budget.

The next $450b would allow for a 39% reduction of the Federal income tax.

The last $100b would be surplus to pay down debt.

LOL, hi Dr. Paul. :)
 
Back
Top