The Koch Brothers Want A New Constitution — And They’re Closer Than You Think

I'm routinely charged sales tax on online purchases, but certainly there would be some blackmarket, we have under table deals now, under the current system. Illegal activity has always been a problem for the State to tax. But, when you can't show the income, it is also difficult to qualify for loans and so forth.

 

They can show the income. They just leave it to the buyer to pay taxes.

Something else that I could see happening, depending on how the law was passed, is someone buying a car for $50 and paying $25k for shipping.

 

So? Then they pay the tax on the shipping.

 

The investment banks are the ones that got use into this mess in the first place. They are part of the problem and none of the solution. Fascism has never worked in its entire 100 years of existence. Did you really just ignore the entire explanation of how it shrinks the value of currency? The days of going dutch after years of exploitation are over.

 

At a rate of lost local revenues for imported products that avoid US labor laws?

 

That's right it won't work. There's just no way to get around the Laws of Economics. Eventually, the US will be forced into Austerity Measures whether it likes it or not.

 

If we keep our budget deficit below the nominal growth rate of GDP, we should be okay, though I would much prefer a balanced budget.

 

Not necessarily. There are work arounds. Capital controls are a possibility, and a restructuring, even partial default might be necessary. Taxes would have to be raised since it would be difficult to sell debt, and some spending cuts would be necessary, but we're not as vulnerable as Greece was/is.

 

Oh look! The newest conspiracy theory. Be *afraid*. Be VERY *afraid*.

Money didn't buy Hillary the White House.
Money didn't buy political office for lots of rich men in the past.
Money is not about to move a two-thirds majority of Congress rewriting the Constitution, which they don't follow anyway.

Ninety percent of federal spending is unconstitutional, according to Professor Walter Williams.
America is so screwed up thanks to the Democratic Sharia Party, I don't think there is much hope for recovery - not when
Fake News is behind Democratic Sharia Party rhetoric, violence, and insanity. Take the Time-Warner sponsored play, Julius Caesar, please.

 

Even if this constitutional convention is only for a "Balanced Budget", people should realize that while it may work at the state level, there's a high probability it would be a disaster at the federal level. As Brookings pointed out:

1. Budget deficits are sometimes beneficial, not just in times of war but also during economic slowdowns. Had there been a BBA during the recent financial crisis, he said, Congress would have needed to either taxes or cut spending that would have doubled unemployment and slashed GDP.
2. Threat of political extortion by a congressional minority. Requiring a super-majority to raise the debt ceiling or to run a deficit “is a veritable summons to political extortion by an intransigent minority” and could trigger a constitutional crisis.
3. Adverse impacts on Social Security and Medicare Hospital Insurance trust funds. The deficit and debt ceiling provisions of proposed legislation, Aaron explained, would prevent access to the Social Security and Medicare Hospital Insurance trust funds to sustain benefits unless there were a three-fifths majority in both Houses of Congress. A similar problem could stymie important government activities vital to combat financial panic just when they are most needed.
4. Congress could still find ways around a BBA, causing more inefficient government. Congress constrained by a BBA but anxious to accomplish some agreed objective would “inevitably resort to all manner of devices that would circumvent those limits in ways that led to inefficient government” such as spending disguised as tax credits (seeming to lower both spending and revenues) or unfunded mandates. “No one interested in good and honest government should increase incentives for elected officials to find devious ways to accomplish objectives dear to them,” Aaron said.
5. Legislation should be used to set policies about which people hold views that change over time. It is unwise, Aaron argued, to lock into the Constitution an economic variable of limiting government spending to 18 or 20 percent of economic output since that level may need to change based on facts and circumstances. He pointed out that just three years ago, the level of government spending in the proposed BBA was 18 percent, whereas today it is 20 percent.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/broo...eral-balanced-budget-amendment-is-a-bad-idea/

 

Inflation would become problematic.

 

You could have a balanced budget Amendment that permits over-spending, when certain conditions are present.

 

Unless the BBA permitted the government to take certain actions during certain financial and economic conditions.

But that assumes the BBA is poorly written.

I don't see that as a problem. The government can always increase the FICA or HI Payroll Taxes to sustain Social Security and Medicare, which is something that will happen within the next 10 years anyway.

Again, that assumes that the BBA is poorly written and not worth the paper it was printed upon

And the BBA can be written in such a way as to foresee certain facts and circumstances which would allow the government to act responsibly.