The United States Congress Repeal the 16th Amendment

In view of my opponent's argument that "Income Taxes provide a substantial source of revenue," I would like to lay out my own argument and alternative plan to counter his first and only point.1. Income taxes are a tax on successWith income taxes becoming more and more unfair by favoring the poor with a small rate and making the wealthiest among us pay more than 50% of the federal government's revenue in taxes, the system needs perfecting. The effective marginal tax rates fluctuate from 35% (people making $388,351 and more) to 10% (people paying $8,700 to $0). With most state and some local municipalities also taxing individuals (and couples) at a progressive rate, the wealthiest constantly bear the brunt of the tax rates in the United States.2. Progressive Tax Rates (as exhibited in the U. S. ) is straight out of the Communist ManifestoAt the heart and soul of America, we have shown clear and decisive hatred and rejection of communism. From its very beginnings in the late 1800s to the McCarthy trials, communism has almost never received a receptive ear in American society or American values. Many things in American society are being more and more bent towards this doctrine. The most obvious but seemingly hidden (or just plain ignored) one is the progressive tax rate. As you get richer, the government takes more of your money, providing a clear incentive for people to stay where they are at.3. Tax Code and IRS are archaic, obsolete, and far to comprehensiveThe system is horribly bad at not enforcing it's own rules. The cause of this problem is subject to much speculation, but for the sake of debate, I will summarize it in light of my own opinion. It is due to the fact that the tax code is over tens of thousands of pages, and an entire industry exists simply to exploit the innumerable loopholes, deductions, and such. Tax code is so comprehensive that IRS agents who, after being taught for 3 months on how to evaluate, discern, and interpret the code, don't remember half of the things they learned 3 months after training is over. The code is broken, the system needs fixing, and these are only a select few problems that represent the miscues in the entire industry as a whole. Now, I will present a clear way for us to fix the problem all together. -----A National Sales Tax-----As a national sales tax is one of the most heated debates in tax philosophy to date, it is indeed an argument to be heard. For decades, the U. S. has lived with a progressive income tax system that penalizes success and destroys incentives for advancement. When someone works hard for their income and risks a lot of it with daily investments and choices (opportunity cost analysis; a little economics sprinkled in there), it should and will be their's to keep and use properly, under this system. Instead of taxing an individual's hard earned money, you tax them on their spending habits. This is not discouraging consumption by any means, and with our standard of living, it isn't a faulty argument whatsoever. This will more accurately provide a better way to both reward people for working hard and watching what they spend. This will not only better teach individuals and households to live within their means, but also a good chance for the government to re-evaluate it's own spending habits and make adjustments that must be made for this system to thrive. This will also give the government to straighten the tax code out. No longer will an entire industry exist to exploit one government document's loopholes. They can simply draft the guideline for the national sales tax. This draft will include how, where, when, and why it will be implemented. With said reasons, I think that this system would reward success and not restrain incentives. This would be a hard change, and it will take time. But, with the American people, all things are possible. With Americans spending money the way we do, revenue will not decline by much. The national sales tax would make almost all the necessary government funding needs and more. But, as previously mentioned, it will force the government into a decision making period. There will be changes. But, as President Obama (although I don't agree with his philosophy or political views) said in his campaign speech in 2008, "We should not run away from change. For change is what keeps progress in line. "This will give states the chance to re-evaluate their own tax codes and tax systems to better comply with the federal level's changes. It will also add more power and pressure to the states to make their own economic climates suitable for living. Thank you, and I look forward to closing rounds of debate. Sources:. http://weakonomics.com...http://www.ehow.com...;http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...;