Gravel’s Tax Day message

From Gravel for President 2008:

Once again, you and millions of our fellow Americans will surrender thousands of hard-earned dollars to the IRS. I have long supported eliminating the IRS, which stifles incentive and investment, and getting rid of the income tax. Now I am running for nomination of the Libertarian Party so that I can fulfill my pledge to institute a progressive sales tax.

You can help me by joining the Libertarian Party. As a member, you can attend the Libertarian convention and participate in the nomination contest as a delegate. Come to Denver to help me win the nomination so I can work to end the War on Drugs that turns millions of citizens into criminals and bust the Military Industrial Complex.

Join our crusade to take back American democracy (and your tax dollars) from corporate and government elites, and consider donating to my campaign. Become a Libertarian and let’s go to Denver where we will change history together!

26 Responses to “Gravel’s Tax Day message”

  1. NewFederalist Says:

    I would prefer a return to a constitutional republic that “American democracy” thank you very much.

  2. Susan Hogarth Says:

    I am running for nomination of the Libertarian Party so that I can fulfill my pledge to institute a progressive sales tax.

    Wow. I didn’t think anyone could out-do Barr on this, but here it is. Un-effing-believable. “Libertarian” candidates lining up bragging about their new tax plans. Sigh. Now, more than ever, the libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party needs to assert itself and help newcomers understand that libertarianism isn’t about proposing new taxes.

    You can help me by joining the Libertarian Party.

    Just what the LP needs - ‘help’ in proposing new taxes and boasting of their ‘progressiveness’. With friends like these…

  3. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    One thing that I admire about Senator Gravel is that he puts his positions right out front, take’em or leave’em. He doesn’t pussyfoot around. He’s offering what he’s offering, and we can take it or leave it.

    I have to leave it—the “Fair” Tax is just as much a dealbreaker with me for Gravel as it is for Barr, and I can’t support the LP endorsing Gravel’s health care plan—but I wish it were otherwise. The man has always had guts, as he proved when he filibustered on the draft and read the Pentagon Papers into the congressional record; and nominating him would break the perceived incestuous relationship between the LP and the GOP.

  4. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Susan,

    I think you’re missing a key distinction between Gravel and Barr.

    I agree that Libertarians shouldn’t support the “Fair” Tax or socialized health care, and I won’t support a candidate for the nomination who proposes either of those things, but at least Gravel has the testicular fortitude to say “here it is—this is who I am, and this is what I stand for.” I can respectfully disagree with him and decline to support him, while admiring both the parts of his platform that I do agree with and the fact that he’s not blowing smoke up our asses about the parts that most of us are likely to disagree with.

    Barr, on the other hand, has the fog machine going full-blast. As best I can tell, he’s hoping to convince Libertarians that he’s “changed”—in specific areas but in non-specific ways—and to simultaneously convince Republicans that he’s the same old Bob Barr, just with added “federalism” and “states rights,” and maybe a step backward off of the dead-end trail that the Busheviks led the GOP down. Even on the “Fair” Tax, he isn’t charging out for it—he’s holding a finger in the air on it to see which way the wind blows.

  5. Joseph O Says:

    As a FairTax advocate since 2002, I have done serious study on its soundness and am actually surprised that Gravel linked it to being progressive. Libertarians ought to do a thorough study of this opportunity to make America more competitive and get government out of our business. As my late Lib friend Ron Crickenburger stated, he would support it if it cut government by 80%. I understood his sentiment, but with a transparent tax, citizens would be more inclined to watch where their dollars are being spent. A few years ago, members of the Virginia LP did vote to endorse the FairTax.

    As for Gravel, read his book Citizen Power. This is a very lucid read on what can be fixed in America. It is a rewrite of his 1972 release of the same title and in that he predicted the demise of our health industry at the hands of the medical-industrial complex. Mike seems to always have been ahead of his time. We need him now for his New Initiative on Democracy (www.ni4d.us) giving citizens the power to make laws and institute initiative and referendum at the national level.

  6. marybaker Says:

    We are going to have taxes. You can’t wish them away or make them go away. So the question is, what kind of tax are we going to have and how do we make then fair and equitable. I am sure most Americans want to abolish taxes, reduce government and government spending. I am sure all Americans would like to see the IRS abolished. But it’s not going to happen anytime soon. So how do we reach more people with a message more can embrace so we can begin to make the inroads we need too as a party.

  7. G.E. Says:

    Joseph O - Um, no thanks.

  8. C. Al Currier Says:

    the libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party ….Susan Hogarth

    ...confusing…
    I don’t call myself a libertarian anymore, but instead a GITEL (goverment-is-the-enemy-libertarian). I not sure what wing we’re in, nor how many are left.

  9. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Mary,

    The prerequisite to “making inroads as a party” is to stand for what we stand for, rather than standing for what we don’t stand for.

    We as a party stand for lower taxes, lower spending, less government (and a broad range of all is included in the party, including the most drastic form of “lower,” that being “none”).

    We as a party do not stand for rearranged taxes, smaller growth in spending, and whatever buzzwords the talking heads are using this week to explain away government growth (“as a percentage of GDP,” etc.).

    If we ever want to make inroads for the former, advertising that we stand for the latter not only will not help us do so, it will impede our success in doing so.

    By all means, we should emphasize those parts of what we stand for that the public considers most embraceable at any given time, but that’s not the same as looking for embraceable stuff that we don’t stand for, to stand for.

  10. Peter Orvetti Says:

    Would one of the more committed Libertarians here be willing to answer some questions/doubts of mine about Libertarian ideas, via a private e-mail conversation? I’ve read the platform, of course, and was briefly active in the LP around 1999-2000, but I have some big questions and I’m open to a respectful conversation.

  11. G.E. Says:

    Peter - Email Mary Ruwart.

    I agree with Knappster, by the way, RE: Barr vs. Gravel.

  12. Ross Says:

    The mass donation week starts today. Chech out http://youtube.com/uder/phillyforgravel for more info.

    http://gravel2008.us/donate_now

  13. drifter Says:

    I am not clear on the whole “LP should not support a new tax” thing? - the way I see it, this is just one step. a step that would change the tax system in 3 major ways.

    1. - it would effectively eliminate the IRS and save us about $40B a year to run it.

    2. It would almost eliminate uncollected taxes. - Instead of chasing people down, you collect at point of sale - you get the tax, or they do not get the item. SIMPLE - About $300B a year.

    3. This would encourage personal savings which is something we desperately need in this country - especially with the SS crisis coming.

    So it is not really a “NEW” tax as much as making a tax managable and a net change of about $340B a year - that is money that we can cut from taxes, - oh about $3,500 in tax savings for every household every year.

    That sounds like a start to me. And cutting taxes and reducing government sounds very LP to me?

  14. G.E. Says:

    1. And cost billions to implement, and make EVERY business owner an unpaid Internal Revenue Agent slave.

    2. This is a bad thing? I don’t think so.

    3. Personal savings would be encouraged by abolishing fiat currency. No one is ever going to be smart to save when the interest they can earn is in competition with a cartel that can create the money out of thin air, and thus charge lower interest rates (and cause price inflation, eroding the value of the money “saved”).

    It IS a new tax. Don’t lie. There IS no way to prevent the implementation of an income tax on top of the sales tax, barring a constitutional amendment—and if we go that far, why not go for the ideal (like Root’s plan)? And it is not reducing government, nor does it promise to. Instead, it conscripts every business owner and service provider into the newly “privatized” IRS.

    Anyone who supports this plan is not only a government-loving aggressor, but an idiot, too. The plan is so abundantly flawed, that it boggles the mind to think that there are actually grown men (and maybe women) who are this dumb.

    Okay, the kid mows your lawn for $40. Does he have to collect the 30% sales tax and send it to the government? A 14-year-old kid? If not, then what about the lawn business he’s directly competing with?

    The FraudTax is a welfare redistribution scheme built on top of a social-engineering plan designed to produce a hand-me-down culture of used goods and black markets.

    I think anyone who supports it should be euthanized, or at the very least, sterilized, to prevent the spread of their stupidity through the gene pool.

  15. C. Al Currier Says:

    Where are we headed, and why do I have to pay sales tax on this handbasket we’re in? You call this ‘fair’?

  16. drifter Says:

    G.E. - I never said I support it, but I do not think it is all bad either - it is better then what we have.

    now you say - 2. This is a bad thing? I don’t think so.

    You are right - I do not think it is bad to pay less taxes, but our country currently spends the money. As someone that follows the law, you pay for those that do not. That is a fact. We all talk about the government stealing our money, but the fact is that extra tax we pay for those that don’t, means they are stealing from you as well.

    I also do not believe it makes every small business a new privatized IRS agents. THe fact is that all small businesses in all but like 2 states already collect a sales taxes. They already do this and have the systems in place. The only way yhou would be saving these small businesses work is to get rid of all sales tax. But the fact is all the governments need money from somewhere.

    “3. Personal savings would be encouraged by abolishing fiat currency. No one is ever going to be smart to save when the interest they can earn is in competition with a cartel that can create the money out of thin air, and thus charge lower interest rates (and cause price inflation, eroding the value of the money “saved”).” - Well I do not think that is the case - maybe for idiots that put money in a savings account, but real savings in assets over time will always keep place with inflation. So it really is a savings then regardless of if the government devalues the dollar

  17. George Donnelly Says:

    He’d eliminate the IRS … and the Senate and the House and the Supreme Court if they weren’t “working” for the people.

    Not that I disagree with eliminating the IRS, it’s just that one needs some context when reading Gravel.

  18. Thomas L. Knapp Says:

    Peter,

    Sure!

    kubby dot communications at gmail dot com

  19. Andy Says:

    “Once again, you and millions of our fellow Americans will surrender thousands of hard-earned dollars to the IRS. I have long supported eliminating the IRS, which stifles incentive and investment, and getting rid of the income tax. Now I am running for nomination of the Libertarian Party so that I can fulfill my pledge to institute a progressive sales tax.”

    Gravel just doesn’t get the big picture.

  20. G.E. Says:

    “real savings in assets over time will always keep place with inflation.”—Not true, and indicative of a general lack of knowledge about how things work.

  21. drifter Says:

    GE - so what doesn’t - look at gold, real estate, etc. adjusted for inflation over the last 100 years and they keep pace. that is fact

  22. Alex Peak Says:

    Mr. Orvetti:

    My email is [email protected]

    Yours,
    Alex Peak

  23. Joseph Oddo Says:

    G.E. “I think anyone who supports it should be euthanized, or at the very least, sterilized, to prevent the spread of their stupidity through the gene pool.”

    I guess this is why you remain unknown with the initials GE. Why can’t you just argue the points of the subject rather than spit venom about people you do not even know?

    Thank you drifter for enlightening those interested about the mechanisms of the FairTax (states already collecting taxes). And the cost to our economy now is appx. $300 Billion a year just in compliance to the maddening 10,000 pages of tax code.

    To add one last point, only new goods will be taxed. The second time sold - homes, cars etc. would not be taxed. And without layers of corporate taxes, the production costs will be substantially reduced keeping retail prices at about the same level with the tax built in. Consumers keeping 100% of their paycheck and collecting from those engaged in black market or off the books income will even out the fairness of this tax.

    Finally with consumers seeing what they pay at every transaction - instead of the withholding trick that was only supposed to fight off Hitler in 1941 - their will be more impetus to cut government spending.

  24. mdh Says:

    On the surface, the fair tax plan sounds like a reasonable proposal compared to what we currently have - not to say that I’m compromising on my overall “No Tax” policy agenda. My one concern with it though is that people will (as they already do for state sales tax) have to finance the national sales tax on large purchases such as automobiles, appliances, etc etc. This would potentially be a boon for bankers, but could effectively make the tax end up costing average people a lot more than what the government gets out of it…

  25. Shawn Says:

    Which pill?

    BLUE: Live in fantasy world where there is zero tax, where unexpected medical outcomes don’t bankrupt people, and where you don’t need to pay for cops or firemen because you have a gun and a garden hose. Where one day the country is pathetically corrupt, and the next day it is perfectly Libertarian.

    RED: Live in the real world, with a fair tax that is at least equally enforced and avoidable, a medical safety net, and a few essential public services. Use the National Initiative to get rid of all the other programs you don’t like, and to give rights back to the states and citizens. Evolve the country into Libertarianism over time.

    Dreaming about it won’t make it happen, son.

  26. Jon Says:

    I support the fair tax, the elimination of the IRS and fiat currency, and bringing the Fed.Res. under government control. And as many of you can’t see, judging by your words, we have to start somewhere. To think otherwise is delusional.

Leave a Reply