Quote Originally Posted by jockeys View Post
all well and good... but where does the money come from? to my way of thinking, the only way for the government to be able to afford to NOT take so much of our money is to spend less... a LOT less, if your numbers are to be realized. such a radical budgetary shrinkage would seem to necessitate a much smaller government than is currently in place.

also, by "tax credit" do you mean "rebate," or "reduction of taxable income?" from your wording it is not clear, they are two very different things.
I mean rebate. Think of it like being paid to file your taxes, no matter how much money you've made, you get paid the same amount.

As for paying for it, I rather like Milton Friedman's suggestion of a 50% flat tax on all income regardless of its source. We could also pay for it by reducing our national defense spending, since we pay more for our national defense than nearly the entire rest of the world combined.

Tim, I believe my suggested fix here is among the least interventionist things a government could do to effect the economy. Police forces, fire departments, road services, and typical forms of welfare are far more interventionist. Please don't mischaracterize me here. The only intervention here is so that a system of free exchange can sustainably continue without limiting anyone's personal liberty. I know full and well what the definition of freedom is and what it entails. Consequences of actions is not a part of the theory of freedom, it is part of the theory of existence. Self-control of action is part of the theory of freedom. I believe relying on religion or culture to "self-correct" this problem with free exchange is incredibly naive and ultimately wrong, given the history of organized religion in the world.