What invariably gets lost in discussions like this is – do we really want the government to be involved in MORE of our lives and making MORE decisions for us? If we limit the tax revenue, they will limit their involvement in only the things they should be involved in – cops/courts/defense, and maybe a few other things. If there was a limit, there would be much discussion about what those things are and a line could be drawn.
At some point, it has to stop. Like I said – 10% of GDP would be a nice limit. If they need more than that, they are extending the role of government into areas they are best kept out of.
If I were king, it would be a hard and fast law to keep govt spending below 10% GDP and we wouldn’t be having this discussion of new taxes at all. People would have to fend for themselves w/o the gov to step in and “save” (i.e. screw) them. People would be smarter, better educated, more leery of slick sales people, more self-sufficient, better savers, and less likely to do stupid things that damage their own self-interest.
Forget the progressive/regressive question. THe question is – why is spending at 35% GDP? And we need MORE tax? Really? Unimaginable that this is a good thing, to me.
