Basil Venitis points out millions of concerned citizens are joining modern day tea parties of the Global Tax Revolt, named after the Boston Tea Party of 1773. They are protesting governments that, in the wake of today's financial crisis, are rapidly strangling their freedom, with endless bailouts, mounting regulations, reckless spending, and the promise of a crippling tax burden. Correctly sensing that freedom is being discarded, they seek to battle this trend by taking to the streets to register their outrage.
Upstart Republican candidate Christine O'Donnell scored the biggest in a string of Tea Party upsets this year over nine-term Representative Michael Castle, a popular former governor and one of the last Republican moderates in Congress. A Tea Party favorite was a close second as votes were being counted in New Hampshire's Republican primary and another Tea Party-backed candidate easily won New York's Republican gubernatorial race.
The people of Delaware have spoken. No more politics as usual, O'Donnell told supporters at a victory rally. The cause is restoring America. Castle is the eighth Senate candidate supported by the national Republican campaign committee to lose a primary this year and the result was perhaps the biggest display yet of anti-Washington anger. The Republican Senate campaign committee issued a terse one-sentence statement of congratulations on O'Donnell's win. O'Donnell shrugged off the likelihood the committee would not spend any money on her.
Venitists want to take government back from the special interests who think the government is their own personal ATM and from kleptocrats who bring us over-sized fake checks emblazoned with their signature as if it was their money to give. To kleptocrats vatbuster Basil Venitis replies: It's not yours to give! Tax increases take money from families and businesses, lowering savings and investment and killing jobs and companies. This is especially harmful in the current economic climate. Starve the beast and join the Global Tax Revolt!
Basil Venitis points out American taxpayers hold a one minute silence every April 15, infamous tax day, at midday as a sign of mourning for the death of their freedom. Furthermore, flags are at half mast in USA throughout April 15 and all meetings held all over the world are preceded by a one minute silence in solidarity with the American people. The gesture is coordinated by the Global Tax Revolt.
With the exception of the Civil War, Americans lived without an income tax from the beginning of the United States until 1913, when the 16th Amendment was adopted. Americans living during that period of time understood that freedom and income tax were contradictory notions. If people wanted to live in a free society, it would have to be a society in which government was prohibited from levying taxes on income. Conversely, if people wanted to live in a society in which government is taxing income, then the price they pay is the loss of freedom.
Everything changed in 1913, when socialist ideas were imported from Europe into the United States. That was the watershed year, the year that brought into existence what would become the twin jugular veins for the welfare state and warfare state, the income tax and the Federal Reserve System. From that date forward and continuing through today, Americans would be coerced, on pain of fine and imprisonment, into sending some governmentally imposed percentage of their income to the IRS. The magnitude of that change cannot be overstated, for it actually inverted the historical relationship between the American people and the federal government.
Basil Venitis, twitter.com/Venitis, asserts that when an economy suffers from erectile dysfunction, via-grab does not work, but only via-cut. The via recommended is to cut taxes, not grab more taxes. There are limits to how much government can tax before it kills the host. Even worse, when government attempts to subsidize prices, it has the net effect of inflating them instead. The economic reality is that you cannot distort natural market pressures without unintended consequences. Market forces would drive prices down. Government meddling negates these pressures, adds regulatory compliance costs and layers of bureaucracy, and in the end, drives prices up.
No comments:
Post a Comment