Professor Hicks, Thank you for providing tax analysis that is comprehensible by us non-economists. As a simple country doctor, I have a great interest in my patients and their community, as this also affects health. For decades, I have followed Dr. Ron Paul and Art Laffer, and now you. What I notice as a recurring thread in your articles is an emphasis on high levels of public spending. This causes me some concern, as I sincerely believe that our Founders sought to maximize individualism and minimize government spending. My favorite passages are in James Madison's comments on the 1792 Cod Fisheries Bill. Looked at another way, Dr. Paul was fond of saying that "we don't have a TAXING problem, we have a SPENDING problem." When it comes to medical care, I feel that the ideal situation would be the mantra: "Cash, Catastrophic insurance and Charity." The same should hold true for all of State and federal spending. Yes, certain infrastructure and public safety items are best addressed by constitutional representative entity, but as for education and medical care, government involvement is only detrimental and the increasing consolidation is leading to a globalist/collectivist tyranny. I found your analysis of tax changes and shifts in capital and labor to be extremely illuminating. Please, continue to provide insights such as that. While the flat tax is not flat and the fair tax is not fair, I keep coming back to the Laffer argument for the lowest, flattest tax on the most broad base. Once again, please do not laugh too much at these simple comments, but, as you yourself said, the goal is to increase tax literacy. Thank you for your efforts. I look forward to future essays. Simple Country Doctor, Warsaw.
Professor Hicks, Thank you for providing tax analysis that is comprehensible by us non-economists. As a simple country doctor, I have a great interest in my patients and their community, as this also affects health. For decades, I have followed Dr. Ron Paul and Art Laffer, and now you. What I notice as a recurring thread in your articles is an emphasis on high levels of public spending. This causes me some concern, as I sincerely believe that our Founders sought to maximize individualism and minimize government spending. My favorite passages are in James Madison's comments on the 1792 Cod Fisheries Bill. Looked at another way, Dr. Paul was fond of saying that "we don't have a TAXING problem, we have a SPENDING problem." When it comes to medical care, I feel that the ideal situation would be the mantra: "Cash, Catastrophic insurance and Charity." The same should hold true for all of State and federal spending. Yes, certain infrastructure and public safety items are best addressed by constitutional representative entity, but as for education and medical care, government involvement is only detrimental and the increasing consolidation is leading to a globalist/collectivist tyranny. I found your analysis of tax changes and shifts in capital and labor to be extremely illuminating. Please, continue to provide insights such as that. While the flat tax is not flat and the fair tax is not fair, I keep coming back to the Laffer argument for the lowest, flattest tax on the most broad base. Once again, please do not laugh too much at these simple comments, but, as you yourself said, the goal is to increase tax literacy. Thank you for your efforts. I look forward to future essays. Simple Country Doctor, Warsaw.
Bravo, again!
Important concept: raising tax literacy.