50 votes

Gary Johnson wants a 23% national sales tax.

Gary Johnson is pushing for the so called "fair tax" which would institute a 23% national sales tax. This is something Ron has warned against over the years.

I wonder when the Libertarian party became the party of higher taxes?

I have not been a fan of Johnson, but even I was sort of surprised to hear he was pushing for a 23% national sales tax.

EDIT: For those who have requested a link. Straight from Gary's website point number 2. http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/economy-and-taxes

EDIT: From Gary's website specifically referencing his support for a 23% national sales tax. http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/presidential-candidate-gary-j...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Exactly!

Exactly!

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

rand paul & Jesse Ventura &

rand paul & Jesse Ventura & gary johnson have all said they were for a vat tax or a flat tax.

i think jesse ventura just doesn't read the right books when he goes to mexico. but i think rand paul is an opportunist. and gary johnson, i don't know him, but bob barr voted for the patriot act, i think the libertarian party is infiltrated by globalists.

lawrence

globalists who propose these

globalists who propose these quasi-libertarian, ignorant politicians to be the front-men for the libertarian party.

the libertarian party has this streak of compromising their beliefs, and this wasn't the party i remembered when i was a teenager. it was great to see irwin schiff rant on and on about one issue while harry browne stuck to his same rehearsed speech. the same with jo jurgensen doing her same rehearsed speech back in '96. if i was a delegate, and not my uncle, i would have voted for irwin schiff, because he just went on and on, nothing was rehearsed.

lawrence

although i would have wanted

although i would have wanted to know if irwin shared the same views as ron paul does on israel and war. he just talked about the i.r.s.; i would have wondered if there was anything else in the world besides that.

lawrence

How about we have the 23% tax only on imported goods?

Domestic content 0%, 23% on imported products?

still a bad idea. it would

still a bad idea. it would be better to have no taxes. no corporations. hemp and marijuana. free trade, but no corporations like we have now.

if everything were completely libertarian, open borders would be preferred in our society.

Take sugar for example, there are import quotas in order to boost the revenue from the domestic production of the sugar cane farms. The sugar cane farmers lobby Congress. To supplement the lack of sugar available at a decent price there is a lot of high-fructose corn syrup in food. Refined sugar and high fructose corn syrup, just suck, and lack nutrition. Maybe there is more refined sugar than raw sugar because of lack of knowledge of nutrition. But high-fructose corn syrup is worse anyways.

if we could import all the sugar we want, high fructose corn syrup would go down to 'nil.

it goes back to these corporations. they really muddle the debate between protectionism and free-trade. Just as Alex Jones says now the corporations wouldn't mind going to a libertarian government because they have control of everything now; it wouldn't hurt them.

lawrence

OK,

But let us trade on a level playing field. In sports the rules are the same for each team. If we trade with a country that allows the same rules we have, no problem, no tax. We import from China and other countries where there is slave labor, no environmental regulations, no worker safty, etc. We put up a tariff to balance the playing field. Trade should be balanced and fair. If not, we balance it out with taxes.

You are right about the sugar, why are we not buying sugar fron Cuba? A Michigan candy corportaion moved to Canada for the advantage of buying sugar fron Cuba, all the employees lost their jobs. The corportaion then exported the candy back to the USA from Canada, no tariffs, as per NAFDA. You can't buy sugar from Cuba in the USA, but if you make it into candy in Canada you can then send it to the USA? Now how stupid is that?

yeah, sorry about some of

yeah, sorry about some of that nonsense.

the truth of it is is that since hemp is illegal to grow here, there is so much we do not see. if hemp was back, it would be a level playing field, i think. it wouldn't matter if foreign governments subsidized foreign corporations to import cheap goods.

that is, if we didn't have these frankenstein corporations in our country, it would balance itself out. i would say just don't worry about the imports. no taxes on them. Plus Geoengineering and chem trails are creating this drought, along with g.m.o. foods.

I personally have a psyche that is limited to agriculture and still haven't found a place to garden (since i've been betrayed so much).

my thoughts are limited to the soil. so what do i care? i mean, if we get rid of these outside forces we wouldn't worry about competition.

Plus, the unions acquired political power back in the day and have hurt manufacturing in this country as well. they single-handedly killed the town i was born in.

there was this strike, and 5 people voted against it, 3 of them were my family members, and the plant said "f.u." and moved to japan. now the town is dead, a ghost town. it shrunk so much.

So i just caution you on putting this trust into unions, which it seems like you do.

i'm limited personally to wanting to grow things in a big garden and just trying to follow the golden rule of doing no harm to someone else. but right now it's an infowar against these chem trails and g.m.o corporations.

lawrence

yeah, yeah. i definitely

yeah, yeah. i definitely agree and see what you are saying. Hazlitt said something about this, about how subsidies are used to level the playing field, because imports are taxed too much, the home country subsidizes the worker to still get the goods out of the country and remain competitive.

Yeah... corporations and cruel governments do obfuscate. Should people just try to be knowledgable about where everything comes from? I agree with people wanting to know about G.m.o. food and disagreeing with rand paul on voting against it.

i would break ties with a strict libertarian ideology and try to eliminate monsanto altogether.

These are multi-national corporations though that are in charges of importing and exporting everything. i wouldn't want to hurt a non-corporate entity.

for the slaves of corporations, it would be better to keep the slaves and eliminate the corporations.

Yeah, it is a muddle. i don't deny that. but no taxes period i think would be good for a domestic economy... and there was a time in america where we were the number one exporter and the number one manufacturer, i think. so don't hurt the exports, if you don't want to penalize the imports.

lawrence

"trade on a level playing

"trade on a level playing field" - does that mean since the chinese have commie slaves working for them and some americans ill-informed or indifferent, tend to like the products they sell, should make us be commie slaves as well to level the playing field?

lawrence

my bad, i couldn't resist.

my bad, i couldn't resist. apparently there are some idiots, -( not you! ) who tend to think that a flat tax is in harmony with the libertarian party.

for those of you uninvolved with the libertarian party in the '90s and lauding the flat tax in the 2012 as libertarian, you people are fools and maybe knaves. you've bastardized the libertarian party.

lawrence

i saw a short segment on t.v.

i saw a short segment on t.v. about a small town in mexico. there was a grain mill that employed 9 workers i think. it was a stone wheel thing. it was neat. but when naft took hold they were out of work. monsanto stole jobs from mexico too.

lawrence

Right

The large corporations come in and destroy the local businesses. Like your grain mill example, the areas people become dependent on the imported food source, all is well until something happens (war) to that imported food source several thousand miles away in a foreign country. That's why Japan, to an extent, protects its farming sector. There is no way Japan can compete with our agricultural productivity, so they protect the Japanese farmers to assure they will have at least some food in the event of an embargo.

You guys crack me up

Johnson is for replacing the IRS with a national sales tax, and a bunch of you are trying to make it sound like he's opposed to tax cuts.

All he's doing is saying we'd be better off collecting our current revenue in a less corrupt manner.

How many spending bills does he have to veto for people to accept that he's a cost-cutter at heart?

If he cuts military spending by 43% as he's promised, that would be a reduction unprecedented in our nation's history.

That said, I'm willing to side with whoever Ron endorses.

the rothschilds would be

the rothschilds would be happy with a flat tax.

lawrence

This tax plan would hurt most Americans

I would be paying more then I pay now. Our current system works out better for middle class and poor people. Do you seriously condone raising taxes on the poor and middle class? There should be no tax increases on anyone.

Probably Incorrect

That is not correct unless you've determined how much of a tax you're paying that you're not cutting the check for. All taxes are passed on. Thus, a tax on your employer is a direct tax on the employees. I know, as an employer, that I don't care how much your salary is, but instead I care how much it costs to employ you. Currently, because of social security matches, unemployment, blah blah blah, the cost to employ is much less than 100% salary (probably closer to 50% than 100%. Thus, if you take all of those costs away, although there wouldn't be an immediate raise, you'd be better off. Remember, it's not the nominal value of your bank account or salary that matters, it is the purchasing power.

The Fairtax would be better for the middle and lower classes than any other tax system (besides a "no tax" system), because the investment into our country because of it would provide so many jobs it would be outrageous, and the probability of the value of our currency rising would also be staggering because we wouldn't have to print as many dollars in a booming economy as we do in a down one (hey, I'm not for printing any dollars at all, but since I have no confidence in the politicians, until we End the Fed... we will keep doinng it).

You should do some more research on the subject. Unless you already have, and I am incorrect, but I do not think that I am and have studied the subject pretty extensively. Good Luck!

I am solidly in the middle to

I am solidly in the middle to upper middle class. Even when factoring in the so called prebate....My taxes would increase more than 600% from what they currently are...and that is being conservative.

I remember when the Fair Tax group first released the plan and had the calculator for people to compare current taxes vs future taxes under the Fair Tax plan. Even back that my tax rate would have been more than 3x more.

No big shocker they no longer offer that calculator.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

You're Missing The Point

Taxing the thing that makes us poorer (spending) vs. the thing that makes us richer (investing/saving) is on its face a much better thing. Likely, from what you've said above, you'd end up spending significantly less, which would either be saved or invested. We don't live in a vacuum, so that benefit would change the parameters of our society, and would benefit everyone. That's just one point, but many other things would change considerably - just wanted to point that out.

Either way, I don't want you to pay more taxes, I want you to pay less. The FairTax, by every estimation that I can manage, would actually be awesome for savers and terrible for spenders. I'm all for that because we've been pushed to accumulate debt and spend our wealth away for years, and we, as a country, need a push in the right direction without all of the perverse incentives that the FED provides and our current tax code provides. Either way, I actually feel like we are all on the same team here and we're fighting around the edges. My personal goal is to push for the maximum amount of liberty, and I am guessing that is your goal as well. We, in this instance, do not agree; and, I am guessing that the reason we do not agree is that one of us understands this particular issue a bit more thoroughly than the other - could be you. But, I guess until I educate myself more on the subject, I won't know (however, you're not providing me with the information to do so). I'd be interested to see the calculator you're talking about and also how you estimated your own personal income tax rate vs. sales tax rate.

Ironically, I would pay astronomically more taxes under the Fairtax than I would in the current system because I'm heavy commercial real estate investments. With all of the mortgage deductions and building depreciation that I wouldn't be able to take underneath the FairTax, I'd get smoked on this bill. I think it would be better for America and better for the economy, so in the short run, I'm willing to sweat through any financial problems it would impose on me personally. I will just try to play the game as it exists in the meantime, and hopefully, we can all push this liberty movement far enough along where the national debate stage is full of these questions instead of us only on a Liberty minded website.

I support Ron's plan to

I support Ron's plan to eliminate the income tax with nothing... However, the current system is far preferable to the so called Fair Tax that Johnson is pushing which would raise taxes on low and middle income families, make every citizen a recipient of welfare (with the so called prebate), and turn every small business into a federal tax collector.

Yeah..Sounds like a great idea.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

Which Do You Prefer?

Which do you prefer... having our small businesses collect the taxes, or letting the Federal Mafia do it?

I agree that taxes need to be much less, but the FairTax is considerably more liberty minded than any other form of taxation. Hey, take the power away from the government. By the way, what businesses have to do currently to comply with the taxcode is significantly more onerous than what the FairTax proposes.

Better question....

Do you think our small businesses want to become federal tax collectors? Do you think every citizen wishes to be forced into a welfare program also know as the prebate? The so called Fair Tax would be a massive tax increase for the middle class.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

Oh yes, requiring anyone doing business...

...to be a collection & reporting agent for the government is SOOO liberty minded. I can clearly see why so many liberty minded people ought to support this idea.

/end sarcasm

BTW, freedom now costs a two bucks and a dime. Inflation and all...

HAHAHA

Decent point... it does cost more now - that made me laugh. It's not ideal, I agree. But, right now, it's considerably worse, right? Right now, every tax paying individual in the country is a federal tax collector, every small business is a tax collector, every everything seems to be a tax collector. I'm not for more taxes, or making people do things, but as long as you "have to" collect taxes, it's probably best to put the onus on the people with the most incentive to lower the costs of items (mostly the people selling them). And, because most municipalities have sales taxes, there is very little that businesses have to do to figure out how to comply. In fact, it would be much easier to comply because you would eliminate the most onerous piece of compliance right off the bat in eliminating the currently ridiculous tax code with weird exemptions, etc.

Like I said, it's just a better alternative. And, if you're going to collect taxes in any way at all, it is better to be a consumption tax that promotes savings and investment (the two things that grow the economy and our standard of living) than to tax income (which discourages it).

-Freedom Costs $2.10

I'm all about truth in advertising

I most certainly agree that IF Dr Paul (Ron, not Rand) or Gary Johnson were elected people would have less of their liberties violated by the people who are government. All I'm asking for is for people to realize its not who the politicians are that creates the problems, but that people believe politicians are needed.

Glad my humor was received the way it was intended.

23% is NOT true

15-20:
http://www.dailypaul.com/247883/consumption-tax-of-15-percen...

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

..

an it will be higher then 23% you CAN BET!

LIAR.

All you do is lie and deceive.

"15-20"???????

which is it?
BOTH?
35% more like it..

ha ha

"OH NO! He has a SON?" Neoconservatives and Liberals EVERYWHERE!

Rand Paul 2016

23% absolutely true as per

23% absolutely true as per Gary's own website. http://www.garyjohnson2012.com/presidential-candidate-gary-j...

Your insistence to the contrary only shows Gary cannot make up his mind, is a serial flip flopper, or is very confused.

Ron Paul 2012 - It's Almost Here!

Yesterday VP Judge Gray said 15%-20%

.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15