Advertisement

The Tax System of a Free Society

  • Robert W. McGee

Abstract

Since the private sector can do just about anything better and cheaper than the government sector, it makes sense to minimize government action to the things that it can do better than the private sector. Whatever things that might be I do not know, but perhaps it can do something better. Economic efficiency will be maximized if resources are permitted to flow to their highest uses, and that means that people should be able to keep as much of their money as possible, since only they know where their money should be spent. It is condescending and an insult to take the position that some politician or unelected bureaucrat who might live thousands of miles away knows how to spend your money better than you do. Yet that is one of the arguments used to fund the federal government.

Keywords

Free Society National Debt American Enterprise Institute Eligible Voter Weighted Vote System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

NOTES

  1. 1.
    Peter Drucker, Wall Street Journal, December 19, 1991, as quoted in Murray Sabrin, Tax Free 2000: The Rebirth of American Liberty, Lafayette, LA: Prescott Press, 1994, p. 174.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Some of the classic documents on this question have been reprinted in Richard A. Musgrave and Alan T. Peacock, editors, Classics in the Theory of Public Finance, New York and London: Macmillan, 1958. Chapters of special interest include Lorenz von Stein, On Taxation, pp. 28-36; Arnold Jacob Cohen Stuart, On Progressive Taxation, pp. 48-71; Knut Wickseil, A New Principle of Just Taxation, pp. 72-118; Francis Ysidro Edgeworth, The Pure Theory of Taxation, pp. 119-136; Giovanni Montemartini, The Fundamental Principles of a Pure Theory of Public Finance, pp. 137-151; Paul Leroy-Beaulieu, On Taxation in General, pp. 152-164; Erik Lindahl, Just Taxation — A Positive Solution, pp. 168-176; Emil Sax, The Valuation Theory of Taxation, pp. 177-189; Rudolf Goldscheid, A Sociological Approach to Problems of Public Finance, pp. 202-213; Erik Lindahl, Some Controversial Questions in the Theory of Taxation, pp. 214-232. For a more modern discussion of some of these dame classic issues that are given from two diametrically points of view, see James M. Buchanan and Richard A. Musgrave, Public Finance and Public Choice: Two Contrasting Visions on the State, Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Walter Block, A Free Market in Roads, in Tibor R. Machan, editor, The Libertarian Reader, Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld, 1982, pp. 164–183, reprinted from Journal of Libertarian Studies 3(2): 209-238 (Summer 1979) under the title Free Market Transportation: Denationalizing the Roads.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sabrin, pp. 51-52; Charles Adams, Fight, Flight and Fraud: The Story of Taxation, Curaçao: Euro-Dutch Publishers, 1982, pp. 49–51.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    For some discussions on constitutional solutions, see Richard_E. Wagner, Robert D. Tollison, Alvin Rabushka and John T. Noonan, Jr., Balanced Budgets, Fiscal Responsibility, and the Constitution, Washington, DC: Cato Institute 1982; Alvin Rabushka, A Compelling Case for a Constitutional Amendment to Balance the Budget and Limit Taxes, 2nd edition, Washington, DC: Taxpayers’ Foundation, 1984; Lewis K. Uhler, Constitutional Control of Government: Setting Limits, Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1989; W.S. Moore and Rudolph G. Penner, editors, The Constitution and the Budget: Are Constitutional Limits on Tax, Spending, and Budget Powers Desirable at the Federal Level, Washington, DC and London: American Enterprise Institute, 1980; Aaron Wildavsky, How to Limit Government Spending, Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1980.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    The U.S. Constitution was intended to place restraints on government. America’s founding fathers believed that there are limits to what governments should do. For other treatises on this point, see Wilhelm von Humboldt, The Limits of State Action, J.W. Burrow, editor, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969; Joseph F. Johnson, Jr., The Limits of Government, Chicago: Regnery Gateway, 1984.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Randy E. Barnett, editor, The Rights Retained by the People: The History and Meaning of the Ninth Amendment, Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    For more on this point, see Alan M. Dershowitz, Taking Liberties: A Decade of Hard Cases, Bad Laws and Bum Raps, Chicago and New York: Contemporary Books, 1988; Gary L. McDowell, Curbing the Courts: The Constitution and the Limits of Judicial Power, Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ron Paul, Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution After 200 Years, Lake Jackson, TX: Foundation for Rational Economics and Education, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    David Merriman, The Control of Municipal Budgets: Toward the Effective Design of Tax and Expenditure Limitations, New York, Westport and London: Quorum Books, 1987.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Joseph J. DioGuardi, Unaccountable Congress: It Doesn’t Add Up, Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1992; James T. Bennett and Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Underground Government: The Off-Budget Public Sector, Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 1983.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anthony W. Hawkes, The Balanced Budget Veto: A New Mechanism to Limit Federal Spending, Policy Analysis 487, Washington, DC: Cato Institute, September 4, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    For a brief history of the payroll withholding provision and the effects that it has, see Mark Schmidt, Income Tax Withholding: Why “First Dibs” for Uncle Sam Leaves Taxpayers Finishing Last. NTU Policy Paper #106. Washington, DC: National Taxpayers Union, July 2002.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    David Butler and Austin Ranney, editors, Referendums: A Comparative Study of Practice and Theory, Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1978; Austin Ranney, The Referendum Device, Washington, DC and London: American Enterprise Institute, 1981.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Letter of Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, June 24, 1813, reprinted in Thomas Jefferson: Writings, New York: The Library of America, 1984, at p. 1280.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Robert E. Podolsky, Titania: The Practical Alternative to Government. Boca Raton, FL: The Titania Group, Inc., 2002, pp. 131–132.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert W. McGee
    • 1
  1. 1.Andreas School of BusinessBarry UniversityMiami ShoresUSA

Personalised recommendations