Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (681664)	5/6/2005 10:03:39 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

"The Framers of the Constitution recognized the potential for government to excess on the beneficence. They intentionally limited the federal government's ability to acquire revenue. By keeping the federal government poor, it made it difficult to pile on too much pork. If it is out there, then we need to get a hold of it and start working it through the states. It will be difficult to do that, because most states are looking for a bigger handout from the feds. Doing referendums in each state is probably the only way. That will require thousands of dedicated volunteers. It is in each of our best interest to get on this bandwagon. We may not be the highest tax nation, but taxes are too high." I agree with all of that. "Repealing the sixteenth amendment (income taxes) might do the trick. It would make the government poor again." I'm quite sure that a Balanced budget Amendment would FORCE a re-evaluation of ALL the federal revenue sources... likely a simplified tax system (with MUCH lower compliance costs), like a flat tax, or a consumption tax, would be the result of that. The feds wouldn't have many other choices --- they would be forced to reform the system and slim down spending.