I am a people person. I am not a numbers person. I am not an economist. When people are hurting, I hurt for them. And the American people are hurting in an economic way. My economic plan is in response to the hurt of the American people. Many of the American people have lost their living wage jobs, to be replaced with low income jobs or no job at all. I set out to solve the jobs problem. To eliminate all things at the federal level that strangle business and eliminate jobs. In the main, those things are: 1. The Federal tax code, 2. Federal regulations, 3. Trade agreements that allowed a glut of foreign goods and services to flood American markets, and 4. Government over-spending. My economic plan addresses all these.

I did some research on taxation. There are basically two types of taxation. Direct and indirect. After my research I have concluded that direct taxes are more detrimental than indirect taxes. If we eliminate direct taxes the people keep all the money they earn.

As I see it we have to give the American people the power and incentive to buy American made products. That is close to the root of the problem. People can't afford to buy American. The more the Americans buy foreign products, the less need there is for American made products to be made. And that means less people needed to make those products.

And so, I crafted a plan that, I believe, would accomplish my goals. I am certainly open to better ideas and plans. To date, I haven't seen any.

With my proposed spending cuts, my plan should generate enough revenue that should be enough the pay for the Constitutional government my plan would fund.


This is another simple tax plan. The difference between this plan and others is this is a pro-American plan.

First we must eliminate all other forms of Federal taxation whether direct or indirect, with the exception of Social Security, and replace it all with the following:


This is a 1% tax on the revenues, no matter how derived, of the several states in the United States of America. Each State has sources of revenue. 1% of those revenues will go to the Federal Government.



This is a 5% tax on all revenues derived from retail sales of goods and services originating in the United States of America. This is a one-time tax on goods. However all retail services are subject to this tax.


This is a 10% tax on all revenues that come from the retail sales of all goods and services that do not originate within the boundaries of the United States of America.

How do these retail revenue taxes work?

Here's an example. An individual is the first buyer of a car. The dealership pays a 5% tax on the revenue from the sale of that car. If the car is a foreign made car, the dealership pays 10% on the revenue from the sale of that car. When the individual who bought that car then sells that car he pays no tax on the revenue he gets from the sale of that car. If he trades the car in on another car, the dealership that then sells the same car pays no taxes on the revenue from the sale.

Let's say the dealer price of this car is $20,000. After the sale, the dealer pays 5% tax which is equal to $1,000. If a foreign made car, 10% tax is paid which is $2,000. If a dealer were to adjust the price in anticipation of this tax to $21,000, or $22,000 for a foreign made car, then the tax for an American made car would be $1,050, and the tax on the foreign made car would be $2,200, because the tax is assessed after the sale of the car, not before.


This plan also calls for the repeal of the current tax code and the 16th Amendment.


The President, along with Democrats and Republicans, talk about creating jobs, but I don't believe they are serious. If they were they would advocate the following:

1. With Capital Gains and Corporate taxes eliminated, investors should have no fear that when they make a sound investment that the government is going to swoop down like a vulture and grab the profit they make. Business owners should have no fear that when they do make a profit, that instead of sharing it with their workers or investing it back into their business, the government should grab it like a hungry fox in a hen house. We should not simply reduce the level of taxation to zero. We need to repeal all laws that allow the government to take that money in the first place. If the laws remain on the books, future liberals could start taking that money again.

2. We need to eliminate all OSHA regulations. These regulations add a costly burden to the cost of doing business in the United States. Those regulations should be in the purview of the States.

3. We need to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency, and all the regulations that go with it. Again, those regulations should be in the purview of the States.

4. We need to stop enacting unfair trade agreements that do nothing but open the U.S. market to other countries creating a trade imbalance, and create loopholes for U.S. companies to move to other countries. And as quickly as possible we need to get out of the unfair trade agreements already enacted. The only trade agreements I would favor are ones that say, "If you want to sell your manufactured goods in the United States, they must be made in the United States.

5. Congress should levy tariffs on all goods coming into the United States to recuperate lost revenues due to the elimination of Capital Gains and Corporate taxes. These tariffs would last no more than 10 years, allowing the United States time to enter into "Manufacture in the United States" trade agreements.

What this 5-point plan would do, theoretically, is encourage investment in American markets, and put Americans back to work. By allowing the States to tax and regulate business as they see fit, would set up competition between the States. The States with the most conservative tax and regulative policies will get the most business, and the States with the most liberal tax and regulative policies will get the least business, in theory. Either way, the American people will benefit from a better business climate in the United States.

This plan would give the American worker a level playing field. It would spur investment without the fear of government taking the profits. It would reduce the cost of doing business in America. It would give incentive to businesses that have moved factories out of this Country to bring them back into this Country. It would put trade deals on an equal footing. We need balance of trade, and we should not enter any unbalanced trade deal, and we should get out of all unbalanced trade agreements.


This seems to be the biggest part of the economic debate, which is spending. What to do about entitlements. Where should the spending cuts come from. There are those who would like to make cuts in entitlements. Others who would like to make cuts in defense. Some want to make cuts in housing subsidies and food stamps. I'm not in favor of either. At this time, I ask that you read what I wrote about entitlements. By doing so you will have an understanding of where I coming from regarding entitlements.

• My understanding of Entitlements you could say is the difference between "now and then."
  
  Does anyone remember what this nation was like before entitlements? Parents took care of their children, and when the parents got old, the children took care of their parents. Parents were not shoved into a home and forgotten about, paid for by some entitlement. In times of trouble, communities helped one another, and churches helped people as well.
  
  Even during the "great depression," THERE WAS NOT ONE ENTITLEMENT THAT HELPED ANYONE. I wanted to make that point plain. If you can find one entitlement that helped one person through the great deperession, I would like to know about it. There was no cash assistance, no food stamps, and no Social Security. By the time any governemnt program started, the depression was pretty much over.
  
  You might wonder where I get my facts. I talked to people who lived through those years, like my dad, my mother, aunts and uncles, and older people when I volunteered at a nursing home. One lady was very specific. While the government would have us believe that if it weren't for the government people would not have made it though the great depression. But, older folks that lived through those days had a different story. That one lady at the nursing home pretty much hated the government for their lies. She was upset with her children for putting her in a home. "This didn't happen when I was younger," she said. "We took care of our parents." She had a lot to say about those days. I will never forget her.
  
  If you want to see what life was like in this country before entitlements, simply read or watch "Little House on the Prairie." When the Ingalls suffered through a tornado that destroyed the entire crop, and killed their cow, there was not one government program to apply for aid. It was the people of Walnut Grove that helped the Ingalls family. And that is what life was like in this country before entitlements. "People helping people" was more than than a slogan, it was a reality. Of course, to make things interesting, Walnut Grove had Mrs. Oleson, their resident capitalist. If redistribution of the wealth is evil, it seems the people of Walnut Grove were very evil. Because, to help the Ingals family, they, at times had to redistribute the wealth. And that is the way it was. People helping people by distributing to anyone who had need. And it was all done without some Government Control Program.
  
  This country survived very well without Federal Entitlement/Government Control Programs for about 150 years.
  
  That was then. What about now? For that part of this discussion, I will draw on personal experience. And I hope I do not lose any respect from those who hate Entitlements, because I hate them too. And I wouldn't be on any if I didn't have to be.
  
  In 1977 I developed something in my left ring finger that was very painful. Bumping that finger felt like being hit by a sledge hammer. I had to really protect that finger or suffer excruciating pain every time I bumped it. It is really hard to work with your hands when you only have one hand that you can use. So, I went to see a doctor. He said I needed surgery. Well, I didn't have the money, neither did my family. So I went to the church I was a member of. The preacher told me to go to the government for help. I had no choice. About 15 hospitalizations later I am still on Government Control Programs. And that is what they are.
  
  I hate it. Federal Entitlements have ripped the heart and soul out of the nation. My church telling me to go to the government for help is just plain wrong. But, that is a symptom of a greater problem. People don't help people anymore, not like they did. Why should they when the government does it? But these goverment programs are not about helping people, they are about government control.
  
  Becuase of my situation, I understand both sides of the Entitlement issue.
  The reason there are so many people on entitlement programs is because Government has created an atmosphere where they have to be. Overtaxation, overregulation, free trade agreements that do nothing but send jobs overseas, have all created this atmosphere. The economy is being destroyed by the Government, as a result, people are losing good paying jobs, being forced to to get jobs that do not pay as well, if they are fortunate enough to get a job at all. My conservative friends know these things to be true, but fail to see the connection between the government destruction of the economy and the need for people to collect from the government. It seems to me that everytime we have economic problems in this country we place blame on poor people, instead of blaming those that have created these economic problems in the first place, which is Congress. Congress has been whittling away at our economy and our freedom for at least the last 50 years, and it's time for that to change.
  
  If we want to do something about Entitlements, we must first change the direction of our Government. Therefore, I propose we end all business taxes, end all OSHA regulations, create a minimum wage system that is based on the cost of living. No one should be denied a living wage. I further propose that we end our participation is job stealing treaties, such as NAFTA. I further propose that we once again collect tariffs. These steps would once again allow businesses to earn a decent profit, while at the same time hire American workers, and pay them a living wage.
  
  In the 60s and early 70s, there were all kinds of factories. Shirt factories, undergarment factories, etc. But, today, even the "Great American Chocolate Bar" is made in Mexico. We need to bring those jobs back to America. When we do that, then we can do something about Entitlements.
  
  I use to be a radio announcer, but because of national shows like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, etc., and radio stations being controlled by computers, or satallite hook up, people like me are no longer needed. So we can't just simply say we need to get rid of Entitlements. It would be inhumane to all of a sudden take people off Entitlements when they are dependent on them.
  
  I hate what Entitlements have done to this country, and if we could just end them without hurting anyone, that would be great. But that is not reality.
  

So, I think now you understand that in my spending plan, entitlements are not on the chopping block. I believe the best entitlement reform in a job. When America is working again, entitlements will become the safety net they were designed to be. They were not designed to be a way of life.

The abiding principle in my spending plan is that government must not spend more than it takes in. That would pose a bit of a problem. In the short run, if my tax plan and my jobs plan would be in place, revenues to the Federal Government will likely go down. In the long run, I believe revenues will go up as the economy goes up. When Americans are back at work, they will have more money, and their buying power will also go up.
When they buy more, revenues to the Federal Government will also go up, which will ease the short term budgetary shortfall.

The equation in my spending plan is very simple. 10% of revenue goes to paying down the debt, and 90% goes to government spending.


My spending plan calls for the elimination of whole departments. But I believe it would be easier to list the Departments, Agencies, Offices, etc., not on the chopping block.

1. The State Department
2. The Defense Department
3. The Commerce Department
4. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services
5. The Transportation Department (limited)
6. Bureau of the Census (limited)
7. Copyright & Patent Offices
8. The Federal Court System
9. The Justice Department
10. The Treasury Department
11. The District of Columbia
12. The Federal Communications Commission
13. Congress
14. Social Security and Aid to the Poor
15. The Postal Service

If a Department, Bureau, Agency or Office is not in the above list, then I believe they should be eliminated. These Offices will allow the Federal Government to fulfill it's Constitutional duties. This is all we should be spending on besides entitlements.

Now, in order to educate you, I give you a link to the A-Z Index of U.S. Government Departments and Agencies.
http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/index.shtml There is no reason we have all those departments, bureaus, agencies and offices. There are thousands, yet these people in Washington today are having a hard time figuring out where to cut.

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

Keeping in mind that any tax and spend happy Congress can change tax law as they see fit. So, no matter what sensible tax and spend plan there may be and eventually becomes law, it may not last long. So, I propose the following Constitutional Amendment:

No tax under the authority of the United States of America, from wherever derived, may ever exceed the rate of ten per cent (10%). And there shall be a tax cap for all taxes under the authority of the United States of America that shall never exceed twenty-five per cent (25%).