1. Tariff all incoming goods to equalize costs with American made goods. Doing otherwise is subsidizing workers in other countries at the expense of Americans while enriching companies that do not employ Americans. The tariff collected would be used to reduce our debit to foreign nations.
2. Eliminate all current tax credits, deductions, and exemptions. This includes non-governmental bodies such as the federal reserve banking system which has never been taxed. Nobody who is doing well should prosper through an unfair advantage over others.
3.Levy no taxes on the first $50,000 of income. This is a per taxpayer blanket exemption for every American, rich or poor.
4.Income from $50,000 to $1,000,000 is taxed at 10%. Only the amount from $50,000 to $1,000,000 would bear this tax rate so for example if someone had an income of $51,000 they would have a tax liability of $100. It would apply to income from all sources: wages, capital gains, dividends or interest income for example.
5. Income above $1,000,000 is taxed at 100% subject to the following deduction: A. For every $10 in wages paid to American citizen wage earners making less than $50,000 gain $1 of income. B. For every $20 paid to American citizen wage earners making more than $50,000 but less than $1,000,000 gain $1.00 of income. Income at minimum wage levels have been considered a fair floor for workers. At the $1,000,000 income level the recipient of that income is making more in one year than a minimum wage worker makes in 65 years of labor. Currently some have accumulated great personal wealth at the expense of the public at large. Under this bill to generate great personal income the earner would have to contribute to the common good and enrich others, most likely those who contributed to the creation of that wealth.
Wealth would become the province of honorable public humanitarians and less the haven of scoundrels. These steps will return manufacturing to the USA because it will no longer be cheaper to produce merchandise off shore. Also it will encourage employment and pay in a more generous manner.
Further, it will offer some relief to the poorest by reducing their tax burden.
It would also provide incentive to the wealthy to put people to work. Trickle down economic theory has not worked. Reducing taxes to stimulate job creation has not worked. The money does not trickle down but accumulates at the top. Under this plan for anyone to accumulate more at the top requires providing more and better jobs to the less fortunate in America. It would also address the illegal immigration problem by making wages paid to non-citizens ineligible for deduction. All income would be subject to this tax formula whatever the source. Amounts are based on 2011 dollars and indexed to minimum wage.
When money earned in a country is spent in that country, you have a closed loop. But when you suddenly have money spent on foreign goods and a huge trade deficit, money is no longer in a closed loop, it just flows to the foreign countries. It's not rocket science. Make it economically more attractive to hire Americans and those Americans will prosper and spend their money. But it only works if they spend it on American goods and services. As soon as it is spent on foreign made goods or services (e.g. helpdesks, customer service centers) then the money flows out of our economy and into that of those other countries. We need to limit imports and the best way is a tariff on imports. I really don't care if it causes a trade war. We win if there is a trade war. Americans would buy American products, putting Americans to work. Foreigners could do the same. Let's see which country would benefit most! I'm betting it would be the USA!! Let's keep it here!
Please bring up points that were missed, elaborate on issues not fleshed out, add ways to make the idea/bill better, suggest a companion for GREATER Raters to consider. Please check your facts, grammar, syntax, punctuation, credit sources and quotes, and keep it under 500 words unless you absolutely cannot—then never more than 700 words. Please keep your criticism constructive. We will likely not print destructive criticism although a well written partisan rant bringing up new issues in the idea/bill or previous Op-eds may be accepted if it ends on a constructive note—especially if it offers an alternative idea/bill.
Shorter "letters" are encouraged that bring a new facet to the subject. The intent of the Op-eds is to fully cover the issue for the kind reader to consider before rating, and not waste their time with redundancy or the dreaded—"people-screaming-at-one-another-while-wearing-earplugs-syndrome." Think of the idea/bill as the base with the Op-eds stacked on top to form a structurally sound argument. The goal here is to have a GREATER US for the greatest number of citizens/neighbors. We may publish your piece without notice—so please only submit completed articles. We may, also, contact you for a rewrite or edit. We might even offer suggestions. It is our intention to fairly present the views of fiscal conservatives, independents, and social liberals—to find the overlap of whole-hearted support (nonpartisan) plus the commonality of the "I-can-live-with-that" (bipartisan).