Justin Amash would consider raising taxes?

[compromise]

http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/12/amash-i-am-not-going-to-take-anything.html

What kind of libertarian could say this?
Everything needs to be considered to ease the country's debt burden, said Rep. Justin Amash of Cascade Township, a Republican with libertarian views. "I don't think it would be a good idea to raise tax rates," he said, but added, "I am not going to take anything off the table if we can resolve some of our biggest issues as a country."
Government taxes is one of two big issues. Without the Fed printing press and taxation, the government couldn't support any of its interventionist policies. Why would you not take raising taxes off the table? In fact, cutting taxes aggressively should be put on the table.

Amash is being a politician here (and a bad one) and not a libertarian. A libertarian should be advancing the libertarian cause, not advancing the state by agreeing to higher taxes. Sad.

Not sure whether this article is legitimate.
If it is, could he be trying to appease the establishment?

 

[LibertyEagle]

I would take anything that Robert Wenzel wrote with a grain of salt, first of all.

 

[CaptUSA]

Come on... quit trying to throw our folks under a purity bus. We know where Amash stands.

We all know what the government needs is spending cuts. If it were possible to get drastic, real spending cuts now, but you had to include some minor future tax increases to get them, I hope you'd do it. Then worry about repealing the tax increases later. It's a flip of what they usually do - tax increases now and spending reductions later that never happen.

If you understand that SPENDING is the tax, then tax rates don't really matter. The tax on the economy has already been increased. Whether or not you vote for rate increases or not.

 

[compromise]

Come on... quit trying to throw our folks under a purity bus.

Wasn't trying to, just found this article and wanted to see what you guys thought.

 

[CaptUSA]

Wasn't trying to, just found this article and wanted to see what you guys thought.

I think we spend too much time navel gazing and trying to scrutinize our own warriors to death. I think each liberty fighter operates in a little different manner, which makes a whole lot of sense. I think the real issues in this movement get clouded when people get distracted by who said what.

I wasn't trying to criticize you for bringing this up. I was trying to limit the criticism of our fellow fighters.

 

[DylanWaco]

To be fair I watched the CNN interview with my wife and both of us were sort of startled at his "on the table" talk. I get that he was trying to come across as the "voice of reason" for political purposes, but I could see how some would be put off by it.

 

[TheGrinch]

Come on... quit trying to throw our folks under a purity bus. We know where Amash stands.

We all know what the government needs is spending cuts. If it were possible to get drastic, real spending cuts now, but you had to include some minor future tax increases to get them, I hope you'd do it. Then worry about repealing the tax increases later. It's a flip of what they usually do - tax increases now and spending reductions later that never happen.

If you understand that SPENDING is the tax, then tax rates don't really matter. The tax on the economy has already been increased. Whether or not you vote for rate increases or not.

This, to think that we're just going to be able to eliminate a bunch of taxes with trillions in debt is not looking at the situation realistically.

There will have to be a mix of taxes and drastic cuts for us even to get our heads back over water... Is that fair to the people of this country, no, but we are still responsible for the bill unfortunately. There's a time for idealism and there's a time for solutions, or else we're just going to continue down this path.

 

[TheGrinch]

To be fair I watched the CNN interview with my wife and both of us were sort of startled at his "on the table" talk. I get that he was trying to come across as the "voice of reason" for political purposes, but I could see how some would be put off by it.

This too. Leaving things "on the table" is not the same as endorsing an idea either. It jsut means that with the looming debt crisis, it would not be responsible to simply refuse to even consider what options we have. Once the options are out there, then he can start talking what he thinks the best solution is.

So plase, don't criticize our people for being pragmatic. The current political environment is not such that we'll get everything we want, but we do need real solutions to the debt problem.

 

[CaptUSA]

There will have to be a mix of taxes and drastic cuts for us even to get our heads back over water.

This whole debate is silly since taxes will go up no matter what. Whether or not they do it in rates or just increase the inflation tax doesn't matter. Taxes are going up. Amash is correct in concentrating on spending. If you can use the method of taxation as leverage for real spending cuts, I say do it already!!!

 

[enrique]

A key too is that his calls for looking at tax rates is not entirely 'un'libertarian if one looks at rolling back many of the deductions and perversions in the tax code. Those distort economies and economic behavior as much as spending and subsidies (they're basically just subsidies too). Now, removing deductions without serious spending cuts would be stupid but that's not what he's saying. Moving to more of a flat tax would be sensible and even though I use the deductions on my returns I'd be willing to give them up for some real change on the spending side of the equation.

 

[supermario21]

Taxes are easy to cut, spending is almost impossible to cut. So, I agree with the notion that a slight tax increase in order to get the Dems to cave on major spending cuts is something I'd probably do, or at least give significant consideration.

 

[angelatc]

Wenzel is also conveiniently forgetting that Amash isn't Libertarian, he's libertarian-leaning.

 

[The Free Hornet]

A key too is that his calls for looking at tax rates is not entirely 'un'libertarian if one looks at rolling back many of the deductions and perversions in the tax code. Those distort economies and economic behavior as much as spending and subsidies (they're basically just subsidies too). Now, removing deductions without serious spending cuts would be stupid but that's not what he's saying. Moving to more of a flat tax would be sensible and even though I use the deductions on my returns I'd be willing to give them up for some real change on the spending side of the equation.

Yep, real - same year - spending cuts! I would pay higher taxes to end the wars, foreign and domestic. We would be safer if vices were left alone by government and not turned into criminal enterprises.

Nor would I consider this to be compromises in that we are paying for the spending either way (debt, inflation).

Part of me wonders if tax rate pledges aren't a wedge issue designed to distract us from bigger problems. Neither side wants to cut - and you have to be open to cutting everything IMO - and neither side wants to increase their tax burden.

In a better system, the tax rate would be flat and spending cuts would be automatic hits to all governement employees, contractors, and check recipients. If they want to be Keynsians and fluctuate spending to monkey with the economy, then they should build a surplus and then be Keynsians.

 

[lakerssuck92]

What he said was that he would be willing to agree to some tax increases in exchange for cuts if it balanced the budget. Practically speaking, this would mean something like 9:1 spending cuts to tax increases...

 

[LibertyEagle]

Wenzel is also conveiniently forgetting that Amash isn't Libertarian, he's libertarian-leaning.

And the more horsehit "libertarians" like Wenzel put out there, the more it drives me away from libertarians, in general.

 

[robert68]

Before the neocons took over the Republican Party, many “libertarians” of today were always called conservatives.

 

[carclinic]

I've voted Badnarik, Paul, Baldwin...third party/liberty all the way my whole voting life. I for one would like a balanced budget amendment where if the government wanted to spend looney money, it would actually hurt our pockets. I for one don't mind paying principal off a debt.