No Corporate Tax: How to fund Defense?

[Black Dog]

OK hopefully this question has not already been posed.

In the documentary film Freedom to Fascism, I believe it is estimated that the summation of all corporate tax revenue is roughly equal to the amount in military spending.

I also believe that most Ron Paul and most of his supporters advocate a minarchist government who, as one of it's few functions, provides for the defense of the nation.

My question is how does a nation raise enough funds through a voluntary process (i.e. not through the robberies and theft known as the [corporate] tax) to construct a powerful military force for defense?

 

[virgil47]

OK hopefully this question has not already been posed.

In the documentary film Freedom to Fascism, I believe it is estimated that the summation of all corporate tax revenue is roughly equal to the amount in military spending.

I also believe that most Ron Paul and most of his supporters advocate a minarchist government who, as one of it's few functions, provides for the defense of the nation.

My question is how does a nation raise enough funds through a voluntary process (i.e. not through the robberies and theft known as the [corporate] tax) to construct a powerful military force for defense?

In the same way the founders proposed ... by using tariffs on foreign goods. The tariffs would not have to be very large and would have the added advantage of encouraging U.S. businesses to bring their manufacturing bases back to the U.S. where the lack of corporate tax coupled with the tariff on goods entering the U.S. would increase their profits and increase the manufacturing base at home. Before anyone cries "protectionism" please realize that in order to maintain our standard of living and maintain a strong national defense it is imperative that our manufacturing base be rebuilt.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Corporate taxes alone would cover about half- not all- of the US Department of Defense. In 2009 (the latest figures I could find on US corporate tax collections), the government took in $339 billion from that source and the budget for the DOD that year (including funds for the "War on Terror" but not supplemental spending for the two wars going on) was $660 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

US imports for 2010 (including energy like oil) were $2.7 trilllion. http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/ustrade.html If you were to fund the Department of Defense alone via a tarrif on all imports that would be a 24% tax on everything. A $100 barrel of oil would then cost $124. If you wanted to fund the entire government at its current levels via tarrifs and balance the budget (around $3.5 trillion) you would have to set tariffs at 130%. That would make a barrel of oil which was $100 rise to $230 ($100 plus the $130 tariff).

Manufacturing accounts for only 13% of our total GDP. http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2010/06/28/manufacturing-output-as-a-percent-of-gdp-by-country/

The manufacturing share of the USA economy dropped from 21% in 1980 to 18% in 1990, 16% in 2000 and 13% in 2008. Still as previous posts show the USA manufacturing output has grown substantially: over 300% since 1980, and 175% since 1990. The proportion of manufacturing output by the USA (for the top 14 manufacturers) has declined from 31% in 1980, 28% in 1990, 32% in 2000 to 24% in 2008. The proportion of USA manufacturing has declined from 33% in 1980, 29% in 1990, 36% in 2000 to 30% in 2008. While manufacturing output has grown in the USA it has done so more slowly than the economy overall.

 

[Len Larson]

The question really is: What is a constitutional defense force?
Many would argue that the force structure we have now is primarily offensive, so using current budgets is misleading.
Figure out what a defensive force looks like, then you will see how you can pay for it.

 

[pcosmar]

to construct a powerful military force for defense?

you write in the 2nd amendment to the Constitution.
And then don't allow any to infringe upon it.

 

[virgil47]

Corporate taxes alone would cover about half- not all- of the US Department of Defense. In 2009 (the latest figures I could find on US corporate tax collections), the government took in $339 billion from that source and the budget for the DOD that year (including funds for the "War on Terror" but not supplemental spending for the two wars going on) was $660 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

US imports for 2010 (including energy like oil) were $2.7 trilllion. http://www.census.gov/indicator/www/ustrade.html If you were to fund the Department of Defense alone via a tarrif on all imports that would be a 24% tax on everything. A $100 barrel of oil would then cost $124. If you wanted to fund the entire government at its current levels via tarrifs and balance the budget (around $3.5 trillion) you would have to set tariffs at 130%. That would make a barrel of oil which was $100 rise to $230 ($100 plus the $130 tariff).

Manufacturing accounts for only 13% of our total GDP. http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2010/06/28/manufacturing-output-as-a-percent-of-gdp-by-country/

Why would any rational person want to fund the government at its current levels. We are talking about how to balance the budget and do away with taxes at the same time. The fact that the price of oil would rise dramatically would be a large motivation to produce and use our own reserves which would greatly reduce the cost of oil and therefore all other goods.

The fact that manufacturing only accounts for approx. 13% of our GDP is a national disgrace. Allowing other nations to undercut our manufacturing through "free trade" until our base goes bankrupt or overseas is a direct effect of buying into the one world crap!

 

[Zippyjuan]

Why would any rational person want to fund the government at its current levels. We are talking about how to balance the budget and do away with taxes at the same time. The fact that the price of oil would rise dramatically would be a large motivation to produce and use our own reserves which would greatly reduce the cost of oil and therefore all other goods.

The fact that manufacturing only accounts for approx. 13% of our GDP is a national disgrace. Allowing other nations to undercut our manufacturing through "free trade" until our base goes bankrupt or overseas is a direct effect of buying into the one world crap!

How would you get rid of taxes (tariffs are taxes which would be hidden the the prices of goods) and balance your budget? How would you balance today's budget without changing any taxes? If you were to go by Ron Paul's pledges, you can't cut medicare or Social Security.

That means you need to cut $1.3 trillion or so from this portion of the budget:

Discretionary spending: $1.378 trillion (+13.8%)
$663.7 billion (+12.7%) – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)
$78.7 billion (−1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services
$72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation
$52.5 billion (+10.3%) – Department of Veterans Affairs
$51.7 billion (+40.9%) – Department of State and Other International Programs
$47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development
$46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education
$42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security
$26.3 billion (−0.4%) – Department of Energy
$26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture
$23.9 billion (−6.3%) – Department of Justice
$18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration
$13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce
$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor
$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of the Treasury
$12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior
$10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency
$9.7 billion (+10.2%) – Social Security Administration
$7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation
$5.1 billion (−3.8%) – Corps of Engineers
$5.0 billion (+100%-NA) – National Infrastructure Bank
$1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service
$0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration
$0.6 billion (−14.3%) – General Services Administration
$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Financial stabilization efforts
$11 billion (+275%-NA) – Potential disaster costs
$19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies
$105 billion – Other

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget

 

[Seraphim]

Occum's Razor at it's finest.

"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass."

There's your Foreign Policy, BITChEZZZZ. The 2nd Amendment IS foreign policy in many ways.

you write in the 2nd amendment to the Constitution.
And then don't allow any to infringe upon it.

 

[virgil47]

How would you get rid of taxes (tariffs are taxes which would be hidden the the prices of goods) and balance your budget? How would you balance today's budget without changing any taxes? If you were to go by Ron Paul's pledges, you can't cut medicare or Social Security.

That means you need to cut $1.3 trillion or so from this portion of the budget:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget

Tariffs are taxes on foreign entities. While they would temporarily raise the cost of goods in the U.S. they would also foster the reemergence of local manufacturing which would of course be tariff free. As local manufacturing reemerges the price of goods would drop. By simply bringing the military back home our government could save billions. Bringing the military back home would save billions more by cutting the manufacturers of war material out of the economy. The removal of 5 or more federal agencies would put us on the road to a balanced budget in short order. Under the scenario I have lain out Medicare and Social Security would not have to be cut although they would indeed need to be phased out in a controlled manner over a period of years.

 

[otherone]

There's your Foreign Policy, BITChEZZZZ. The 2nd Amendment IS foreign policy in many ways.

yup x 1 JILLION.

Let the frakkin' states fund the military (as well as everything else). Let Washington go begging for cash instead of unilaterally printing more.

 

[Danke]

In the same way the founders proposed ... by using tariffs on foreign goods. The tariffs would not have to be very large and would have the added advantage of encouraging U.S. businesses to bring their manufacturing bases back to the U.S. where the lack of corporate tax coupled with the tariff on goods entering the U.S. would increase their profits and increase the manufacturing base at home. Before anyone cries "protectionism" please realize that in order to maintain our standard of living and maintain a strong national defense it is imperative that our manufacturing base be rebuilt.

This.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Tariffs are taxes on foreign entities. While they would temporarily raise the cost of goods in the U.S. they would also foster the reemergence of local manufacturing which would of course be tariff free. As local manufacturing reemerges the price of goods would drop. By simply bringing the military back home our government could save billions. Bringing the military back home would save billions more by cutting the manufacturers of war material out of the economy. The removal of 5 or more federal agencies would put us on the road to a balanced budget in short order. Under the scenario I have lain out Medicare and Social Security would not have to be cut although they would indeed need to be phased out in a controlled manner over a period of years.

Those "foreign entities" add the tax onto the price of goods. US manufactures would lose a lot of competition from foreign goods and would be freer to raise their prices. Then if we have a high tarrif on their goods, the other country responds by rasing tarrifs on goods they buy from us- meaning we lose jobs for exporters. Another effect is that as the tariffs are added, the demand for and value of imported goods fall which means you need even higher tariffs to obtain the same level of revenues you were counting on.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/tariff-trade-barrier-basics.asp#axzz1nYu2WRUT

Tariffs increase the prices of imported goods. Because of this, domestic producers are not forced to reduce their prices from increased competition, and domestic consumers are left paying higher prices as a result. Tariffs also reduce efficiencies by allowing companies that would not exist in a more competitive market to remain open.



Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/08/tariff-trade-barrier-basics.asp#ixzz1nYuTFovd

It may seem like you are getting government spending free- paid for by foreigners, but that is not the case- they will be in the prices of things you purchase. The taxes are simply better hidden and you are paying them more discretely. No free ride.

 

[oyarde]

You could fund the allowable spending under Article One , Section Eight easily and give Americans a tax break and still chip away at the debt , and put everthing else back where it belongs , with the states , the people , private charities and tip jars.

 

[osan]

That means you need to cut $1.3 trillion or so from this portion of the budget:

Discretionary spending: $1.378 trillion (+13.8%)
$663.7 billion (+12.7%) – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)

Should be able to cut at least 71% of this by ending the wars, refraining from getting into any others where we are not directly attacked militarily by a regular army, closing the several extraneous overseas military bases, clipping CIA/NSA charters limiting them to very specific duties and placing them under a very strict managerial microscope meaning no more operations beyond that of strictly passive observation; all other actions to be undertaken by military only. These along should take a large bite out of the big fat military butt.

We could reduce active and career military forces, replacing them with updated nuclear arms and a very simple policy that includes withdrawal from all international treaties, strictly defensive positions (non-interventionism), and the clear message that any nation which attacks us militarily will be turned into a vitrified, glow in the dark wasteland that will remain uninhabitable for the next several hundreds of thousands of years, not a solitary soul whether man woman or child to be spared.

Augment that policy with ones drawing heavy manufacturing back to our shores which, once secured we develop steep ramp contingency planning for the rapid conversion of manufacturing resources for wartime production just in case we decide not to nuke someone but must repel an invading army (yeah right).

$78.7 billion (−1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services

Gone. $78.7 down...

$

72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation

Gone. $151.2 down...

$52.5 billion (+10.3%) – Department of Veterans Affairs

Gone. $203.7 down...

$51.7 billion (+40.9%) – Department of State and Other International Programs

Gone. $255.4 down...

$47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development

Gone. $302.9 down...

$46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education

Gone. $349.6 down...

$42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security

Gone. $392.3 down...

$26.3 billion (−0.4%) – Department of Energy

Gone. $418.6 down...

$26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture

Gone. $444.6 down...

$23.9 billion (−6.3%) – Department of Justice

Gone. $468.5 down...

$18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Gone. $487.2 down...

$13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce

Gone. $501 down...

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor

Gone. $514.3 down...

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of the Treasury

Might keep this one, though they would have to prove themselves worth their keep.

$12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior

Gone. $526 down...

$10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency

Might keep this one, but only to observe and report. ZERO executive power. Let us say we cut them by 71% (7.5 billion)

$533.5 down...

$9.7 billion (+10.2%) – Social Security Administration

Gone. $540.5 down...

$7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation

Gone. $547.5 down...

$5.1 billion (−3.8%) – Corps of Engineers

Gone. $552.6 down...

$5.0 billion (+100%-NA) – National Infrastructure Bank

Gone. $557.6 down...

$1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service

Gone. $558.7 down...

$0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration

Gone. $559.8 down...

$0.6 billion (−14.3%) – General Services Administration

Gone. $560.4 down...

$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)

Gone. $560.4 down...

$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Financial stabilization efforts

Gone. $560.4 down...

$11 billion (+275%-NA) – Potential disaster costs

Gone. $571.4 down...

$19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies

Gone. $591.2 billion

$591.2 plus $471.23 (defense) == approx. 1.063 trillion dollars cut.

Not so difficult, actually. Trim the fat, restore the business environment and it is almost miraculous to observe how a nation returns to economic health.

I say put the bulk of it to the torch and those in our way to the sword.

Have a nice day.

 

[osan]

That means you need to cut $1.3 trillion or so from this portion of the budget:

Discretionary spending: $1.378 trillion (+13.8%)
$663.7 billion (+12.7%) – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)

Should be able to cut at least 71% of this by ending the wars, refraining from getting into any others where we are not directly attacked militarily by a regular army, closing the several extraneous overseas military bases, clipping CIA/NSA charters limiting them to very specific duties and placing them under a very strict managerial microscope meaning no more operations beyond that of strictly passive observation; all other actions to be undertaken by military only. These along should take a large bite out of the big fat military butt.

We could reduce active and career military forces, replacing them with updated nuclear arms and a very simple policy that includes withdrawal from all international treaties, strictly defensive positions (non-interventionism), and the clear message that any nation which attacks us militarily will be turned into a vitrified, glow in the dark wasteland that will remain uninhabitable for the next several hundreds of thousands of years, not a solitary soul whether man woman or child to be spared.

Augment that policy with ones drawing heavy manufacturing back to our shores which, once secured we develop steep ramp contingency planning for the rapid conversion of manufacturing resources for wartime production just in case we decide not to nuke someone but must repel an invading army (yeah right).

$78.7 billion (−1.7%) – Department of Health and Human Services

Gone. $78.7 down...

$

72.5 billion (+2.8%) – Department of Transportation

Gone. $151.2 down...

$52.5 billion (+10.3%) – Department of Veterans Affairs

Gone. $203.7 down...

$51.7 billion (+40.9%) – Department of State and Other International Programs

Gone. $255.4 down...

$47.5 billion (+18.5%) – Department of Housing and Urban Development

Gone. $302.9 down...

$46.7 billion (+12.8%) – Department of Education

Gone. $349.6 down...

$42.7 billion (+1.2%) – Department of Homeland Security

Gone. $392.3 down...

$26.3 billion (−0.4%) – Department of Energy

Gone. $418.6 down...

$26.0 billion (+8.8%) – Department of Agriculture

Gone. $444.6 down...

$23.9 billion (−6.3%) – Department of Justice

Gone. $468.5 down...

$18.7 billion (+5.1%) – National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Gone. $487.2 down...

$13.8 billion (+48.4%) – Department of Commerce

Gone. $501 down...

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of Labor

Gone. $514.3 down...

$13.3 billion (+4.7%) – Department of the Treasury

Might keep this one, though they would have to prove themselves worth their keep.

$12.0 billion (+6.2%) – Department of the Interior

Gone. $526 down...

$10.5 billion (+34.6%) – Environmental Protection Agency

Might keep this one, but only to observe and report. ZERO executive power. Let us say we cut them by 71% (7.5 billion)

$533.5 down...

$9.7 billion (+10.2%) – Social Security Administration

Gone. $540.5 down...

$7.0 billion (+1.4%) – National Science Foundation

Gone. $547.5 down...

$5.1 billion (−3.8%) – Corps of Engineers

Gone. $552.6 down...

$5.0 billion (+100%-NA) – National Infrastructure Bank

Gone. $557.6 down...

$1.1 billion (+22.2%) – Corporation for National and Community Service

Gone. $558.7 down...

$0.7 billion (0.0%) – Small Business Administration

Gone. $559.8 down...

$0.6 billion (−14.3%) – General Services Administration

Gone. $560.4 down...

$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)

Gone. $560.4 down...

$0 billion (−100%-NA) – Financial stabilization efforts

Gone. $560.4 down...

$11 billion (+275%-NA) – Potential disaster costs

Gone. $571.4 down...

$19.8 billion (+3.7%) – Other Agencies

Gone. $591.2 billion

$591.2 plus $471.23 (defense) == approx. 1.063 trillion dollars cut.

Not so difficult, actually. Trim the fat, restore the business environment and it is almost miraculous to observe how a nation returns to economic health.

I say put the bulk of it to the torch and those in our way to the sword.

Have a nice day.

 

[osan]

You could fund the allowable spending under Article One , Section Eight easily and give Americans a tax break and still chip away at the debt , and put eveerthing else back where it belongs , with the states , the people , private charities and tip jars.

Bullshit.We repudiate the debt in toto and in one fell swoop. It is rotten to the core and is therefore illegitimate. Not a soul in these United States owes so much as a red cent toward this falsely assumed debt. Dissolve the Federal Reserve Bank, seize its assets as well as those of all its members. Hunt those men down globally, capture them, try them, convict them, sentence them, and publicly execute every last one of them, broadcast live to the entire planet as a warning to anyone who trespasses upon us.

Were I king the world would clamor to trade with the good people of the USA. Likewise they would lose control of their basic bodily functions and quake in their shoes at the very hint of a thought of crossing us. THAT is what we should be. Free, strong, friendly, kind, fair, and implacable when offended.

 

[No Free Beer]

I believe in corporate tax.

 

[furface]

"Defense?" Are you kidding? The best defense in this case is not to have an offense. Standing militaries are ALWAYS meant to keep the people down. They're a jobs program that also secures the government authority structure. Military security means security for rulers, not the people.

Bottom line. At the federal level the US needs a coast guard, a border patrol, and an air defense system. You're talking $50 billion max per year.

Who's going to attack us? I mean really. Mexico? Not with any military they aren't.

Al Qaeda attacked us because of our meddling. Stop meddling and we don't get attacked.

 

[Black Dog]

I believe in corporate tax.

Dr. Paul doesn't which puzzles me because I believe it is condoned by the Constitution?

Anyways I still can't think of a way to fund defense without income and corporate tax. Maybe I'm just not creative enough?

 

[pcosmar]

Dr. Paul doesn't which puzzles me because I believe it is condoned by the Constitution?

Where? And to that point,,can you even find the word "Corporation" in the Constitution?

it is my understanding that Corporations are a later invention of the legal system in collusion with Government entities (Graft).