Let’s Replace the Tax Code with a National Lottery

The United States has an all-voluntary military, so why not an all-voluntary taxing system? Aren’t liberals all about freedom of choice? Their sloganeering includes the operating premise “My body . . . My choice!”

So why not expand the notion of what’s mine you can’t touch to property. “My land . . . My choice.” My money . . . My choice.”

And since so many people say they should be paying more in taxes, let’s give them an opportunity to volunteer in big ways. Volunteerism is a good thing. Charities are based on volunteerism.

I propose that we start a national lottery. If you believe that big government is good for America, then you can show it by purchasing more lottery tickets. The people who really believe this nonsense that the spending is not the problem, then they can act on that belief by buying more lottery tickets and encouraging their friends to do the same.

Make the lottery international. Let anybody purchase lottery tickets. If people in China or Japan or Albania want to get in on the game, let them do it. Their voluntary contribution only helps us.

The use of lotteries to raise money for government expenditures has a long history in the United States. We see them being used at the state level with great success. People love to gamble, and all the money will go to a good cause – the Leviathan State.

You may think that it’s un-American to raise revenue by lottery.

Lotteries in colonial America played a significant part in the financing of both private and public ventures. It has been recorded that more than 200 lotteries were sanctioned between 1744 and 1776, and played a major role in financing roads, libraries, churches, colleges, canals, bridges, etc. In the 1740s, the foundation of Princeton and Columbia Universities was financed by lotteries, as was the University of Pennsylvania by the Academy Lottery in 1755.

During the French and Indian Wars, several colonies used lotteries to help finance fortifications and their local militia. In May 1758, the State of Massachusetts raised money with a lottery for the "Expedition against Canada."

Benjamin Franklin organized a lottery to raise money to purchase cannon for the defense of Philadelphia. Several of these lotteries offered prizes in the form of "Pieces of Eight."

George Washington's Mountain Road Lottery in 1768 was unsuccessful.

At the outset of the Revolutionary War, the Continental Congress used lotteries to raise money to support the Colonial Army. Alexander Hamilton wrote that lotteries should be kept simple, and that "Everybody ... will be willing to hazard a trifling sum for the chance of considerable gain ... and would prefer a small chance of winning a great deal to a great chance of winning little." Taxes had never been accepted as a way to raise public funding for projects.

At the end of the Revolutionary War the various states had to resort to lotteries to raise funds for numerous public projects.

What was good enough for George Washington and Benjamin Franklin is good enough for me. Gambling is preferable to theft.


Comments

comments

  • /.murphy

    Well... things are a little different today from the times at the end of the Revolution. What a silly and politically impossible idea! Today, there are simply too many people who will choose not to participate in this kind of lottery; in other words, too many people like me have figured out that gambling is like a special tax levied on those who are bad at math.

    • don

      now thats a good point aginst

  • DockyWocky

    Now, if the prize was getting to pull the lever on the trap door under a certain cervical-collared C-in-C, they wouldn't have any problem raising trillions.

    • redneck63625

      Do you mean "clerical-collared"? If so, what is the "C-in-C" reference???

      • JT1964

        I think that the first C could be Commander and the second is probably Chief.

        • DontTreadOnMe11

          Actually the first "C" probably stands for Communist.

      • DockyWocky

        Cervical collared as in neck surrounding collar, of rope...

    • warpmine

      I've been a strong advocate for just such a policy for years. I'd bet a certain number of party leaders would also command a high price.

  • davenewbry

    Probably start out OK, but after people learn that a lottery is no more than a tax on people who aren't any good at math, it'll die out and elected politicians will once again renew the cycle of spend and tax. The fair or flat tax seems to be the best solution.

    • don

      what may i ask is the lottery tick you buy now figured on? now the gov. gets more than their share now

  • Gaines Bruce

    In Tennessee we have an Education Lottery that finances a lot of kids education. We have a sales tax on just about everything but no State income tax. I would favor the FairTax nationally but hear the same objections to it as I hear from the lottery. The poor folks have to spend a disproportionate share of their income for the lottery tickets/taxes. Still there does not seem to be a decrease under the present economic conditions. This certainly works a lot better than those tax the rich options.

    • HappyG

      In Obamaland, the poor will use their EBT cards...

    • papajair

      Bruce,
      With the FairTax, all legal residents receive what is known as a prebate to alleviate the tax paid on food & necessities, regardless of income level, based upon family size. This helps the poor as the intent is to essentially tax only purchases of new items, while giving relief on basic necessities. "Undocumented workers" would still pay the tax but wouldn't receive the prebate. So a family of four at or below the poverty level receives the same prebate as the family of four at the millionaire level. It also abolishes the IRS as the tax is collected at the state level at the point of sale and as such removes all the loopholes in the current tax code which allows special interests to lobby for more special considerations.

      • Gaines Bruce

        The "undocumented workers" would have to at least have a social security number.

        • papajair

          More than that, the proposed bill contains this language (in addition to a Social Security number):

          "a certification that all listed family members are lawful residents of the United States"

    • don

      do you think the poor don't buy lottery tickes now?

      • Gaines Bruce

        Of course the poor buy lottery tickets now and without a whimper. It is the politicians that compalin about it being an unfair hidden tax on the poor. But who do you think I am standing in line behind at the counter?

  • http://www.facebook.com/maranatha.mark Maranatha Mark

    I think you had better check the wording on your tax forms... it talks about your Federal Income taxes being "voluntary" and "contribution", but if you don't volunteer to pay a percentage of your income, they will put you in jail! LOL! I like the Federal Sales Tax of no more than 7%, or a flat tax of 10% much better. Even my beloved Rand Paul is wanting 17% in a flat tax, which is too much. 10% is enough, and anyone not born after 1982, has to prepare for retirement without Social Security, but instead has to take their SSI tax funds and put them into a personal IRA or something like that. Social Security and Medicare have taken us into bankruptcy as a nation. It has to go, as we simply can't afford it. We need to revamp malpractice insurance and get medical cost down. We need to get these blood sucking lawyers off TV, looking for class-action participates! They aren't doing these law suits gratus, and they don't care what injury you or you loved ones have suffered... all they want is a piece of the pie!

    • don

      no no noi the goverment will soon ownall the retirement funds. its in the planning stage as i write

    • Brenda

      A flat tax sounds good, but the problem with it is that while they may start off with 10%, there is no guarantee that it will stay that amount. Look at the increases income tax code since its inception. You simply can not trust the government to follow its own rules since they have the power to change those rules whenever they want.

      • http://www.facebook.com/jerry.mcconnell.75 Jerry McConnell

        That can and does happen with any kind of taxes. The flat tax is just less cumbersome for the taxpayer and it would save billions in costs for the government. TWO BIG PLUSSES.

      • John

        The one good thing about a National Flat Tax of .07% (I think 10% is too high) is that if the government were to try and raise the tax rate, everyone would be affected and everyone would be screaming their heads off, not just one or two segments of the population. The other good thing about the flat tax is that you could eliminate the IRS and the flat tax payment would go to the Treasury, not the Federal Treasury but the individual State Treasuries. Once the individual state treasuries had taken what they need to run their State (and there would be a well defined listing of items that States could spend Tax Dollars on with no exceptions, ever) they would remit the balance to the Federal Treasury on a monthly basis and the States contribution in total for all states to the Federal Treasuries would be limited to 10% of the National GDP. Then, if the States or the Federal Government needed more income they could run State/Multi-State and Federal Lotteries.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Prairie-Pilgrim/100001242596765 Prairie Pilgrim

          What makes you think a flat tax plan would eliminate the IRS? It would not. A flat tax plan would still be based on your income, and filing requirements. Not that filing is a legal duty now, but it is perceived as such, and that would not change under a flat tax plan.

          The only means to achieve the elimination of the IRS would be to abolish the 16th amendment (was never ratified either, but they act as though it were) and the purported basis of a tax on income.

          The better fix of all is Ron Paul's steadfast demand to audit the Fed, then ABOLISH it, and return all the creation and monetary policy to the Congress and the Treasury. This would eliminate the sinkhole which is the bottomless pit of the Federal Reserve, made up of international bankers who create fiat currency out of ink and paper, and do not create sufficient quantities to EVER pay off the interest they charge for it's public use. It creates perpetual debt, which soaks up 100% of the Federal INCOME TAX (fully disclosed in the Reagan admin. by the Grace Commission).. "not a nickel goes to paying the services of the Federal gov't, it all goes to paying the interest on the national debt."

          For a primer on how current fiat currency works, read the free online "Modern Money Mechanics."

          The money needed to fund our national and state gov't(s) is a PITTANCE of what is created (and collected) by our economy and the (corporate, excises, tariffs, and fees.. not personal income) taxes upon it.

          The INCOME TAX could be ELIMINATED, and not a thing would suffer for it. It is purely a means (as others here have noted) of exerting CONTROL on the behavior and "perceptions" of the "force and power" of the Federal Gov't, and therefore the Citizen's subservience unto it.

          Actually, a national lottery is not that bad of an idea, IMO.. it would be voluntary, and dedicated to that which it was created for.

        • John

          I do not disagree with anything that you said. There are a lot of good ideas out there but how do we bring them into reality. With all talk and no action there is nothing that is going to happen unless all liked minded people in this country come up with a plan. The bad guys have had a plan and it has been in affect since the Civil War. The most frustrating thing to me is that the good guys don’t seem to have a plan to save this United States of America. When I was eight years old (that was in 1953) my Grand Father told me that there were only three things that he needed the government for the first was the strongest most well equipped military in the world to protect this country from those that would do us harm. The second thing was the best and most affordable transportation system in the world that included roads, rail, water, air and an affordable energy source. The third item was for government to promote an atmosphere under which individuals and businesses could succeed. He also did not like the fact that our government was legislating competitive advantages for one company over another. May bee that would be a good place to start. I enjoyed reading your comments.

        • mogul264

          An even more fair way to finance the government is to institute a national sales tax. This would ONLY be spent on national affairs, so each state, each county, city, could add theirs, each approved by 3/4 of the registered voters of each governmental entity. Yes, the IRS would be totally eliminated, and only a few accountants would be needed to keep tabs on finances. ALL OTHER TAXES MUST BE ELIMINATED!

          This way, people would be instantly aware of just how MUCH their government entity was spending, there would be no more political wrangling of tax breaks for special interests, and the governments would have to either live withing their means, or try to justify a need to increase their own sales tax rates. For immediate cash needs, a lottery could be used, or the governments could borrow for a short time, but repayment MUST be done before more could be borrowed!

          It would be eminently fair! EVERYBODY pays their share, and those who buy the largest quantity, the most expensive items, would pay the most. An allowance could be granted to those who are at poverty levels. To shave expenses, buyers could buy cheaper items. Savings would not be taxed, whatsoever! Businesses would only pay sales taxes, as well.

          Why will this not EVER happen? Congress! They are charged by the Constitution to fund the national government, and LOVE the power they have to grant special deals to special interests. All in return for 'donations' to political coffers, potential to be hired as 'consultants' to business interests upon retirement (something ELSE which should STOP), and the ability to take advantage of economic 'opportunities' they become aware of , before the rest of us, of course!

          You and I call this "insider trading" and WE are punished if caught doing it! Until recently, Congress could, AND DID, just this very thing , with most Congress members becoming VERY wealthy while in office! Since they 'punish' their own, little or none is ever done!

          Were you, as was I, into believing there MUST be a Mr. Smith, Congressman Mr. Straightshooter out there somewhere? We've all been FOOLS. Mr. Smith was just a product of Hollywood! Silly me, I believed the hype, at one time!

      • warpmine

        Super majority of both houses needed to raise the tax rate. Problem solved. National sales tax would be preferable to anything so that even the underground economy of the drug world would have to pay their share of the taxes when those expensive cars and accessories are bought.

        • StanB

          National Sales tax would be a huge mistake, Huge. You cannot trust Government to not raise the tax. You will be paying a federal tax on everything you prurchase. Most states already have a state sales tax, some are regulated by County. The only way a National Sales Tax could work without politicians raising the tax; is to take away the ability for government to raise that tax. SInce that won't happen, a National sales tax would be harmful to the general population. It would be a monetary boon to spending addicted politicians, who would see no limit to their illigitimate appitite for taking even more money from the people. Take a look at Europe, which has a National Sales Tax, which started out small; now some of those countries are paying 25%. A government which spends money like an addict on drugs, cannot be trusted to keep that National Sales tax at a low fixed rate. They don't care how much you scream about them raising taxes; they do it anyway. They didn't care about people not wanting Obamacare; they passed it in the middle of the night anyway. We must first bring our government back to abiding by our Constitution, before any reasonable debate can be brought about concerning a Flat Tax or National Sales Tax. Without a compliant government (all 3 branches) abiding by the Constitution, with it's limitations of said government, and seperation of powers; a new method of taxation would be a joke upon the people; and a cash cow for greedy politicians. You cannot even trust elections to be fair; far too much election fraud to be any kind of a deterent.

          Tax rates in Europe (From 2010) VAT (Value Added Tax) tax = National Sales Tax

          Monday, May 31, 2010
          Subject: Current European tax rates - America next?

          United Kingdom
          Income Tax: 50% VAT: 17.5% TOTAL: 67.5%

          Germany
          Income Tax: 45% VAT: 19% TOTAL: 64%

          France
          Income Tax: 40% VAT: 19.6% TOTAL: 59.6%

          Greece
          Income Tax: 40% VAT: 25% TOTAL: 65%

          Spain
          Income Tax: 45% VAT: 16% TOTAL: 61%

          Portugal
          Income Tax: 42% VAT: 20% TOTAL: 62%

          Sweden
          Income Tax: 55% VAT: 25% TOTAL: 80%

          Norway
          Income Tax: 54.3% VAT: 25% TOTAL: 79.3%

          Netherlands
          Income Tax: 52% VAT: 19% TOTAL: 71%

          Denmark
          Income Tax: 58% VAT: 25% TOTAL: 83%

          Finland
          Income Tax: 53% VAT: 22% TOTAL: 75%

        • Steven

          You can't trust the government not to raise the tax.

          That is NOT an argument against any TYPE of tax. It applies equally to ALL types of tax. If you did 5 minutes research on the FairTax, the most widely supported version of a national sales tax, you would know it includes a provision repealing itself if the 16th amendment, which authorizes the income tax, is not repealed within 2 years.
          Also note: A national sales tax is NOT a VAT. A VAT taxes transfers at ALL levels. A national sales tax would ONLY apply to RETAIL sales.

        • warpmine

          I've done my best to explain it in simple mathematical terms but can't make headway against low information voters. They always come back with the VAT or state sales tax they have already etc...etc....
          This is why we're so screwed, people refuse to listen to logical rational thought, impossible.????????????????

        • Steven

          I am not sure who you are referring to as a low information voter. With the possible exception of that point, I think we agree on most points in this discussion.

        • warpmine

          Wasn't you Steve but I do take exception to even my best friends that cannot seem to understand the simple points outlined in HR-25

        • warpmine

          Straw man argument and btw, did you ignore what I typed or do you not understand "super majority" term?

        • /.murphy

          LOL! Adding maximum potential income tax rates to the VAT renders your whole enterprise meaningless because one is a tax on income and the other is a tax on consumption. You might want to leave this kind of stuff to "numbers" people in the future.

      • Steven

        The REAL problem with a flat tax is that our CURRENT system has been accurately described as 'a flat tax with 50 years of refinements'. It is not that the rate will change, it is that it won't stay flat.

        Also note: Your criticism of a flat tax applies even more to the current system.

    • http://www.facebook.com/pamela.sellarole Pamela Sellarole

      One thing I hate about the way things are going right now is that people who are on food stamps and SSI, SSDI, or any other government dole programme are being treated like property. The government tells you what to do with what they give you--making it not truly a gift, but rather a leash that keeps you dependent on them. They should be fostering your gaining independence by saving some of what you get to better your life. They want you to use what they give you, and only what they give you so they can control your every move. There needs to be some serious welfare reform--something that will allow the poor to rise up and be poor no longer--like creating more jobs that will allow educated people to use their brains and not their feet all the time, raising the minimum wage, and completely revamping the tax code so no one pays more than 9.9% (No government is more important than God, Who only demands 10%.) Deductions for yourself and other dependents should remain, as should charitable deductions (some people only give to charity so they can write it off their taxes), but they should close all other loopholes.
      Someone mentioned a federal lottery--that would be nice--and VOLUNTARY. And those receiving welfare should be allowed--or even encouraged--to invest some of the money, or otherwise save it, so they can get off welfare faster. And one amount of money should be allotted per person that, as long as a person makes less than x number of dollars a month, should never go down. Another way for the government to save money would be to knock off certain cabinet departments (education should be left to the states, as in the 10th Amendment), the FBI, CIA, ATF, and Homeland Security should all be combined and streamlined. AND Congress should receive no pay until they balance the budget. This business of a multi-trillion dollar national debt is ridiculous!

      • /.murphy

        Do you think God is a conservative? If so, do you think you could you try to get him to roll that 10% back to... maybe 8% or 9%? Now there's an idea.

        • GreatTrolling

          God has a spending problem. He should reduce taxes.

        • /.murphy

          I expect He would if He were really a conservative, as so many people seem to think. But maybe He's not...

        • Ole SC

          I think he is conservative, he only passed out the fishes and loafs once, from then on the people had to go fishing and start cooking!! Cut them right off of his welfare program!!

        • /.murphy

          Then next time you talk to Him, tell him his taxes are too high.

        • Pamela Ellis

          It's not God's fault or responsibility. Put the blame where it is due,,,I am tired of these demons blaspheme My Lord and feel sorry for them at the same time as they will get their answer face to face and it won't be pretty I HOPE..

        • Ole SC

          I'm talking about God not Obama, they are not the same but some fools think that they are....just saying!!!

        • Ole SC

          Hey, I just talked to God and he said he would be happy with YOUR 8 or 9% because that would be a lot more than what you have been sending!! LOL

        • /.murphy

          Those voices again, huh? Probably ought to see someone about that... LOL!

        • Ole SC

          Oh yeah, I forgot about that voice.....Hummmmmm, now I'm confused!

        • danimal

          maybe YOU should listen to the voice of god, gutter tramp

      • warpmine

        Raising the minimum wage would do nothing except raise unemployment for no/low skilled workers. It would therefore be easier and beneficial to just pay overtime to the skilled workers. Nobody would get the experience necessary to be upwardly mobile financially. I don't pay anybody minimum wage now because the market trends upward to a healthy balance of the going rate. Meanwhile as the government destroys the dollar, I raise my prices to compete for higher living costs that forced labor costs to rise as well. Vicious circle it is.

    • warpmine

      How about a bounty system for lawyers. Get $X amount for every head or perhaps tongues. Tongue removal would go along way in stopping lying wagging muscles from polluting the tranquility of honesty.

      • NM Leon

        You're being too hard on lawyers. Remember, it's the 99% that make the 1% look bad.

        • warpmine

          Am I??? Unfortunately, I know to many in my own family and trust them as far as I can through them. Perhaps we can change the profession to law interpreters to those that actually perform as intended but the rest are lower than whale dung at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.

        • NM Leon

          Read again, it's a lawyer joke...99% making 1%...never mind.

        • warpmine

          Sorry, went past me to fast today. Really po'ed at Md Gov Owe' Malley and his control agenda. I really despise this leprechaun.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gail-Steelhammer-Cohen/1313002671 Gail Steelhammer-Cohen

      Haven't you heard? They want to confiscate our IRAs and 401Ks and pensions to go to government bonds and give us $600 (yes six hundred dollars) a month to live on??????????

      • Uptite

        They can ALL kiss my ars!

    • grumpy3625

      Aren't you referring to the social security "contribution"?

    • grumpy3625

      Yeah - if you're making 60,000 a year and paying a flat 17% you would be shelling out 10,200 in taxes--obscene! I go with the lottery.

  • HappyG

    Why do I think that DC would still lay claim to the winnings?

  • polmutant

    the only problem is an i Pennsylvania, they will sell the lottery to the british, just like the voting machines and election counters were bought by spain. "and the sheoples cry out take our wool, eat our children, only leave us grass to eat! because i am a man, a proud american man! can i have a food stamp to feed myself? shelter me. I am an american man! buhahahaa
    land of the free? home of the brave? perhaps home of the enslaved and land of the depraved.

    • don

      point taken

      • polmutant

        Thank God there is 1man with understanding. May the Lord Bless you and keep you; may no weapon formed against you or your family prosper. yeah and Amen,

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NLORN6B3ZNGCAJTFHWWFUUEY4Q jong

    Of course this leaves out the manipulating of it by either the Mafia or Obama with either the same result. And Obama would buy his tickets with tax money.

  • Germeten

    Spending is not the problem, but taxes are. Kudos, Gary, for the first glimmer of imagination, that some other way might be found to pay for spending. But again as in most of your posts, you're operating from incomplete information. You see some things are already expressed in the Constitution clearly, and others not so well, if at all. That gives the government some flexibility and lee-way. Unfortunately, some of the choices that government made over the past century weren't very smart.

    Taxes became necessary immediately following the signing of the Federal Reserve Act. The reasons is that government signed over OWNERSHIP of all currency printed, to the banks. Read what it says at the top of a bill-- "Federal Reserve Note." That means it's corporate paper, the Federal Reserve Bank owns it, they paid for it, (cost of paper & ink.) But prior to that, government owned the currency, and could print as much as it needed to to cover the government's debts and other business. Of course there was the condition that it be backed by gold, but that's a minor detail for this discussion.

    Lincoln got tired of dealing with bankers and issued government money (the way the Constitution allows) called green-backs. This made the bankers furious, that they should be cut out of the process of indebting and profitting from government business, which bankers consider their "entitlement."

    Anyway, once OWNERSHIP of currency was signed over to the Federal Reserve, the government could no longer print money for itself. All money thereafter printed, belonged (and belongs) to the Federal Reserve. It was at THAT point that the government became effectively broke. Now the government can always revoke the Federal Reserve Act and reclaim OWNERSHIP of currency, by simply not renewing it any given year, but that was never even suggested when the government asked the Fed how it should manage its business given the shortfall. The answer the Fed gave was classic: "Tax the people!"

    But follow the logic. Taxes became necessary because of an exclusive cartel on currency that was granted to ...banks. Now banks charge interest on loans, which is a private tax on borrowers to have access to currency. So you pay a private tax AND a public tax, thanks the Fed.

    There are a few good ideas I've heard to fix the problem. One is to nationalize the banks, or simply reframe the agreement by which they receive currency. Rather than allow the Fed to purchase currency for cost of printing (which allows them to immediately realize a profit of the face value of the bills vs. what they actually paid, which is scandalous, outrageous and the most epic scam of our time, not to mention that they lend it back to US at face value + interest, compounding forever, but I digress) ...simply pay the banks a small distribution fee, do NOT allow them to charge points or origination on loans. ALL loans would be made to US citizens and companies, directly from the government (because government would own the currency again), which would put most private lenders out-of-business, unable to compete against government's low rates. (Retraining programs would help ex-bankers find honest, gainful employment.)

    Then, instruct the banks to deduct 1/10th of a percent from all automated transfer payments, and direct back to the government. That would be the sum total of all federal taxes, .01% ...in 1995 $555 TRILLION dollars passed through the FRBNY. Do the math, one tenth of a percent adds up fast. Everyone would pay, it would be a painless, fair tax. (No nonsense like lotteries, which like all forms of gambling lowers the moral standard. I'm sure a minister like yourself can appreciate the moral decay.)

  • redneck63625

    "Africanus Criminalis" would spend all cash-convertible transfer payments on the lottery, generating new examples of our "parsimonious" welfare system for media events staged by the communist party (formerly known as "Democrats") to exploit in their pursuit of EVER MORE transfer payments...

    • GreatTrolling

      Great trolling redneck63625.

  • good160

    WELL WELL NOW.

  • gbandy

    Anything that would make everyone get some 'skin" in the game. I am just sick and tired of hearing the crybaby liberals complaining about the rich not "paying their fair share". Now when you raise taxes on the job producers what do you think will happen.

    • GreatTrolling

      Great trolling gbandy.

  • Uptite

    That would be sweet..
    as well we would be a lot less disgruntled at this Thieving Gov't!

  • http://www.facebook.com/randy.renu.5 Randy Renu

    Great idea. It would be the only lottery in the country that would LOOSE money.

    • Uptite

      Fine, as long as I can keep my hard-earned $$ instead of giving it to liberal morons, for not doing their jobs. I am so tired of supporting the takers, it's a challenge supporting my own!

  • 7PastorCarmine7

    Flat Tax of 10% for all.

  • doloresK

    That sounds good but I do not think the Fed Govt will give up the tax. How about a lottery to reduce the Fed debt? All the profits go to pay it off. Nothing goes into the budget - UNTIL all the debt and borrowing is gone. Including paying back Social Security with interest.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_O24NYT5HOQNDEJ3TUT5QOTLOF4 TM

    Taxes are nothing but a way to pillage money from us citizens to support a crooked government run by the demoncrats.

    I like the fair tax plan but the demoncrats don't because then they would not be able to control your money.

    demoncrats are the rude of all that is evil.

    • faithandhonor

      It's more than that. The Fair Tax is a tax on consumption, NOT production. This not not only gives individual more choice, it allows the accumulation of capital (savings) for investment and business-building, and to build wealth. This creates great pools of working capital for THE PRIVATE SECTOR. This makes for FREEDOM from political and financial manipulation, cronyism, etc.

      Production taxes are the favorites of the politicians, because they take the fruit of your labor at the very beginning, soon after you earn it, and therefore prevent the building of wealth, and the freedom of choice of what to do with that wealth. It thereby creates the possibility of more dependency, and demagoguery born of envy.

    • GreatTrolling

      Great trolling TM.

  • SSMcDonald

    Try to understand. The tax code is not about taxes, it is about CONTROL! If it weren't about control, the Fair Tax would have been instituted a decade ago as the Fair Tax will collect more taxes.

  • tboneofill

    How about my Tax Plan. 10% sales tax on all transactions excluding housing. Make housing 3 % sales tax. Income Tax of 20% for 250K or more. Thats it.

  • Victor

    Never happen, although it might work, it also would reduce the need for so many politicians! It's currently all about keeping the RICH(MARXISTS) RICH, WHO ARE BORN THAT WAY IN THE FIRST PLACE AND NOT ANYWAY ELSE! MARXISTS(ANTI-CHRIST'S) ARE JUST "BORN" MARXISTS & YOU CAN'T FIX IT SHORT OF DEATH! Just saying...

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Gail-Steelhammer-Cohen/1313002671 Gail Steelhammer-Cohen

    Yup and I bet all the people who are getting most of the dole will finance it - poetic justice

  • noelle2013

    Big Govt is NOT good for the US!!!!!!!!!!!!
    IT IS SO TIME TO GET RID OF THE INCOME TAX! ABOLISH THE INCOME TAX AMENDEMNT IRS AND THE DAMN FED RESERVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    WE NEED TO GO BACK PRIOR TO 1913!

    WE MUST GET MONEY FROM THE OLD WAYS: Tariffs and other taxes!

  • dbur

    I think we also ought to choose Congress by lottery. Anyone with a college education and/or record of successfully supporting self and family gets their name in the pool. Chances are we would get a lot better representatives by random chance than by the manipulated, low information voting system we have now.

  • Elaine Bruemer

    obummer has just come out with a lottery. Pay him some money and you can be in his presence. How lucky can you get??

  • Pamela Ellis

    hmmmm,,,I wrote about this idea on here as a matter of fact and now someone is acting like it was all their idea,,,,hahaha,,,I guess it does not matter as long as some listened and many
    agree,,because even those that are too lazy to work will often find money from somewhere to play the lottery i've noticed.......Isn't it funny how we can come up with such good ideas to put us on a good track of getting out of debt and helping the people at the same time and after 12 years now, our so called smart guys cannot come up with or implement even ONE????

  • grumpy3625

    I just did a little calculation: say 200,000,000 national lottery tickets were purchased weekly at $1.00 per - the take on that for the whole year would be 11,200,000,000. That's eleven trillion, boys and girls! Let's say that each week a winner would rake in 10million - the winnings would come to 520,000,000 - that's just over half a trillion. After the winnings were paid out there would be 10,680,000,000 left. That's over 10 and a half trillion! Think about it; the debt would be paid down in lightning speed, small businesses would be booming due to the revenue left over for reinvestment and growth because they would not be paying any taxes and employees would take charge of their own destiny because they would get a full paycheck. Mind blowing!

    I've always wondered why we have to file a tax return at the end of the year--think about it. The money is already taken out of our pay and we all line up to file a return. Something has always struck me fishy about that. We have to divulge all this information about ourselves and sign it. Did you know that it's NOT a crime to NOT pay but it's a crime to NOT file??!!! Here's my take: it's all about control, the government keeping tabs on you. The money that they actually get from individual taxpayers (or tax payers) is a pathetic drop in the bucket.

  • Brabado

    In my opinion, the Lottery Idea would be part of a solution IF, and only IF, Washington DC was full of Honest, Transparent, Accountable, and Law Abiding Public Servants, but it is not, and will never be... Now, you reach your own conclusions!
    As long as Politicians are Free to raise all kinds of money, from all over, decent, honest, hard working Americans, will never be able to compete, or hold public office... Therefore, we are doomed with Corruption and Lawlessness amongst those that have been "elected", but do not want to admit it... Is anyone reading this message able to hire a high price lobbyst?
    I thought so...

    THE HOME OF THE BRAVE AND THE LAND OF THE FREE... SO FAR!

  • Progressive Republican

    Wow. Did ol' Gary used to work for wnd or is he just trying to get a better job there?

  • http://www.facebook.com/aemoreira81 Adam Moreira

    Given the scam of national lotteries (i.e., Nigerian lottery scams), I can't see this working.

  • jcgreen2

    If the lottery concept doesn't catch on, how about this...
    We tabulate our federal income taxes and then send that amount not to Washington but to the States we reside in. That's where the money should stay anyway. It's a travesty that we have allowed the federal income tax to become so monstrous that there is little left for the States, where it properly belongs and should be spent. Washington is doing terrible things with our money, so why not cut them off. If they don't get our money in the first place they can't misuse it. If enough of us did this, they wouldn't be able to arrest us all, and it might prevent them from doing the outrageous things they are spending our money on.

    • William Wallace

      Exactly. The states have to send money up the chain to the feds who then use it to hold the states hostage with federal grants. The higher tax revenue states also become enslaved to other states with lower tax revenue and have to give them money. Why should tax money from one state be used to pay off a project in another state? How does that work?

      Then you also have the basic problem of waste and inefficiency. The popular estimate is that you get maybe 37 cents on the dollar for bureaucratic waste and administrative costs. So the government sucks up 63 cents for every dollar we send them before it comes back down the pipeline somewhere else in the nation. Love it.

  • http://twitter.com/MootsaGootsa Michael Micelli

    Better than a lottery is the World Voting Exchange by Motsa Gootsa.

  • Saint Germaine

    The tax code is going to be replaced by a 14% of income for everyone. You gotta problem with that you elite MOFOs.

  • hiskid1964

    great idea