What are the most harmful government programs? (part 2)
Chad weighing in on “what are the government’s most harmful programs”. (See this link to the first post on this series and Insider’s list).
I basically believe that all government programs at the federal level outside defense (including border enforcement), foreign policy, interstate commerce regulation, and revenue collection are basically harmful. Specific programs that I think are more
harmful are:
1. The tax write off for mortgage interest. This entitlement is one of the main reasons the move to a flat tax is so hotly contested. An adjunct to this is the Progressive tax policy that the US utilizes. While the idea behind it sounds good, those who make more pay more, in practice it actually punishes success. A much better solution would be what I call a Split Tax. There would be a national sales tax of 8% plus a flat tax of 8%. The flat tax would kick in at the poverty level plus $5,000 dollars. The only deduction would be for home purchases, and then only the initial down payment or the money from the sale used to pay off the mortgage.
2. Social Security. Beyond the fact that it is going broke, it is also inefficient it the way it maximizes funds for the worker. It also is a poor social policy tool in that is discourages savings and will actually subject most workers who rely on it as their main source of retirement income to a poverty level existence. I have had several thoughts on what I think would be a better solution and currently I am thinking that the employer match continues as is, the employee contribution is directed towards an approved IRA or 401K program. This has the advantage of allowing the employee to maximize his retirement funds while still providing a “social safety net” for those who need it.
3. One where I think a lack of a coherent government program is costing us. Infrastructure maintenance. Lack of funding on the state and federal level is leading to deteriorating infrastructure (especially roadways) across the country. It also ends up costing the taxpayer money since deferred maintenance is always more expensive than maintenance performed when needed.
Similar Independent Sources posts:
- What are the most harmful government programs?: Econoblog Marginal Revolution asks the interesting question on what are the most harmful government programs. Their thoughts: At the top I will put ...
- Farm Supports: Unfair Welfare (or Bringing New Meaning to the Word ‘Pork’): First a plug. If you pay taxes then the best $50 you can spend is to join Tax Payers for Common Sense. The pork spending that they identify and fight ...
- Deadly Budgeting: The WSJ reports that 911 service surcharges on cellphone bills aren't actually being used to improve 911 service -- despite the fact that some callers ...
- Tobacco and the Flat Tax: First, a quick introduction. I would like to thank the people at Independent Sources for honoring me with the invite to express my opinions here. I ...
- Kleiner Perkins Clinton & Reid LLP: Talk about hubris!Somewhere along the way, the government (who can't even turn on a light bulb), thinks that it can be a successful venture capitali ...










April 28th, 2006 at 6:03 am
The flat tax is in my opinion the only fair way to have taxation. The current progressive tax rate system is not only unfair, it encourages dishonesty. I would propose a 15% flat rate on every person with an income that exceeds the poverty level by $5000.00, all corporations, churches, clubs, PACs, political parties. In short evey entity that has an income either earned or through donations. There would be no exceptions and if someone didn’t pay his taxes he would, not could, go to jail for a minimum of 5 years.
Your proposal for social security is basically what Bush wanted to do and the Democrats demegoged as “privatiging” social security. I personnaly think social security should be privatized. Goverment administration of the program has put it in the shape it’s in and the coffers have been raided by congress too many times. There would have to be some kind of transition worked out but privatization is the way to go.
As for maintaining the national infrastructure, I agree a coherent program needs to be implemented. I don’t think the current state of the infrastructure is due to underfunding but is because funding is diverted to pork and unrelated projects.
Chuck