Mish’s Pie in the Sky, Tax and Spending Compromise Proposal

Something For Everyone to Hate

I propose a combination Flat Tax + a Consumption Tax + Surtaxes. Here are some general starting point ideas. I reserve the right to change my mind on any of these proposals.

  • My consumption tax would exclude food, medicine, cleaning supplies, and clothes up to a certain amount. As proposed, my consumption tax is anti-regressive.
  • To encourage work, I would do two things: For starters, exclude the first $X in income from any taxes, say $15,000. Second, I would prohibit food stamps from buying snacks, beverages, candy, ice cream, etc., but they could be used to buy soap, cleaning supplies, shampoo, etc. 
  • I would end all subsidies, tariffs, and itemized deductions including mortgages and charitable deductions. All, means all. This of course means the end of the marriage penalty. Everyone pays their share and everyone is treated alike. 
  • To appease the progressives, I would put a surtax on income above a certain amount, say $1,000,000. I would put a huge surtax on stock options above $250,000 treating them as ordinary income. This would rein in shareholder dilution and pretty much force CEOs to get paid in salary rather options. The net result would be a flat tax from $15,000 to $1,000,000 with stock options hammered ending shareholder dilution as executives would toss them.
  • In return for the high end taxes on the wealthy, I want something in return: National right to work laws, the end of public unions, and bankruptcy reform. All cities and municipalities would immediately be eligible to declare bankruptcy. States too, why not? Something needs to be done with the public union pension crisis and bankruptcy is the only practical solution. 
  • The ideal corporate tax rate is zero, but in the spirit of compromise and to guarantee offending everyone on something, a modest increase from 21% to 22% is in order. To encourage production in the US, the same minimum tax would apply on foreign operations as well, ending overseas tax havens.  

Expected Moans

The result would be an extremely simple tax code sure to offend everyone on something.

  • CEOs and executives would moan about stock options. 
  • Those making more than $1,000,000 would moan about the surtax
  • Multinational corporations would moan about inability to shelter foreign income.
  • Progressives would moan about food stamps and right-to-work.
  • Union advocates would moan about right-to-work, bankruptcy reform, and the end of public unions. 
  • Homebuilders would moan about the end of mortgage deductions.
  • Charities would moan about the end of charitable deductions.
  • Exporters would howl over the end of tariffs.
  • Any businesses getting subsidies would howl.

Apologies offered if I did not upset everyone on something. Let’s continue with the income side of the ledger to see if I can offend still more classes.

The Income Side

How about a balanced budget amendment? 

That would force some real compromises on spending. Let’s start by bringing home all the troops from everywhere. Cut military spending in half. If the world wants us to be the world’s policeman then they should help foot the bill. 

The only way to reduce medical spending is to put skin in the game. Medicare for all is the reverse of what’s needed.

We waste too much money fighting terminal illnesses only to keep people in pain and misery.

I do not want to be artificially kept “alive” nor do I want to pay for others to be artificially kept alive. 

We need a right-to-die law and right of refusal. 

If people want to be kept alive in misery, then private insurance is the ticket. 

Want to be treated for cancer? Then buy a policy that covers it. Otherwise, you don’t get chemo, but you do get all the pain killers you need. 

Need insurance for a heart transplant? OK, provided one is able to travel, let insurance companies offer lower cost plans mandating expensive operation take place overseas, say India. Demand treatment in the US? OK, pay more. The idea is to increase competition and reduce costs in as many ways as possible.

US citizens should not pay more for drugs than corporations charge overseas citizens. Right-to-import would take care of that. We would have immediate drug price parity. 

How about tort reform? 

The opportunities to cut medical spending waste are endless. 

Have I offended everyone on something yet? Possibly not so let’s go after the banks hard.

Sound Money

I propose sound money, a 100% gold-backed dollar.

That means a dollar represents a certain weight of gold, available immediately on demand. 

The implied result is an end to fractional reserve lending.

And I would end the Fed.

For details on how this might be done, please see The Case for a 100% Gold Dollar by Murray Rothbard.

Biden’s $2.3 Trillion Infrastructure Boondoggle: What Would You Cut?

This post is in response to a comment made to Biden’s $2.3 Trillion Infrastructure Boondoggle: What Would You Cut?

A reader commented 

America has been in two wars for nearly 15 years! That was a lot of money being spent too, did you have a problem with that, considering the value of these two endeavors? 

Hardly anyone has been more against military spending waste than me. I have repeatedly called for enormous cuts. 

Defense spending was not in Biden’s proposal and I asked for ideas regarding Biden’s proposal, not pie in the sky ideas. 

Pie in the Sky Compromises

This post addresses the tax side, the spending side, sound money, and genuine pie in the sky compromise ideas.

I am OK with compromise tax hikes as long as they are accompanied by genuine reform elsewhere. 

An additional beauty of my proposal is that each side stands alone. Tax reform can work in isolation, so can spending reform and bank lending.

The best result would come from a combination of ideas. I offer the above plan as a genuine set of compromises.

Addendum

Here is an interesting reader suggestion to consider.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

31 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
AWC
AWC
2 years ago
Yup, Pie in the Sky.   😉
Webej
Webej
2 years ago
Good luck finding donors if you run as a politician!
If the world wants us to be the world’s policeman then they should help foot the bill. 
Don’t count on too much mercenary money coming in.
KidHorn
KidHorn
2 years ago
Pretty sure Pepsi would be the biggest complainer of them all.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
Gold and the dollar are both moving down today. But the dollar might be on day four of a new cycle that could drive it back up (Uncle Buck is acting really sluggish)…while gold appears to be dropping into an overdue daily cycle low.  In general since April 1, the dollar appears to be weakening, and a break below the Jan 6 low would be a game changer imho. Conversely gold has been trending up strongly since April 1.
What I’m looking for is for the dollar to get back up above the trend line (around 90 now) or to break below the January low of 89.44.  I expect the dollar to hold this time, and for gold to be soft this week, until it bottoms…..but it could reverse at any time.   Two or three down days is all I look for….maybe less.
The reason I care is that I’m trying to swing trade, not invest. Even when the COT is favorable, gold doesn’t go straight up. If I were in a position to buy physical gold, I think these prices are fine. But If I buy physical gold, I need to pay for it by making some good trades.
When I do enter this time, I’m going to go half GDX and half SLV.
RonJ
RonJ
2 years ago
“We need a right-to-die law and right of refusal.”
We also should have the right to take any FDA approved drug, such as hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin in off label use, as other FDA approved drugs are. Ivermectin has an excellent safety profile, with nearly 4 billion prescriptions. It is not dangerous to use it to treat Covid. The number of studies which show it has efficacy against Covid, are continuing to rise. The government of Goa is now going provide it to all adults. The FDA and WHO are advising against Goa using it without justification to object. People’s lives are at stake.
Zardoz
Zardoz
2 years ago
Reply to  RonJ
If you don’t provide a link to all these ‘studies’, you’re just another Russian programmed kook with a lightbulb up his butt.
RonJ
RonJ
2 years ago
Reply to  Zardoz
There is no Russian programming involved. There are some 200 studies/trials on HCQ from around the world.
You just want to ignore them. There are a number of studies on Ivermectin, as well. You just want to ignore them.
In response to inquiry, the FDA said it had not reviewed the data on Ivermectin. The studies do exist. The NIH changed their recommendation from no, to neutral, after reviewing the data. The FDA has no excuse for not having reviewed the data, so long after the NIH has.
Both are FDA approved drugs. FDA approved drugs do not need an EUA for any doctor to prescribe them off label.
The FDA is blocking the use of either of these drugs for an ulterior motive.
People have taken HCQ for R.A. or lupus for decades. HCQ was considered a safe drug by the FDA. If it was safe for on label use, it is safe for off label use. Ivermectin is extremely safe. There is no legitimate reason for the FDA to prohibit these drugs if a doctor believes it may help their patients.
Eddie_T
Eddie_T
2 years ago
“To appease the progressives, I would put a surtax on income above a certain amount, say $1,000,000.”
You bloody communist, you! 
In general such a flat tax structure would suit me fine, other than the fact that I’ve structured my financial house for the reality we live in, and therefore would lose most of my existing tax dodges if we made such a radical shift.  
Radical changes like that, while sensible in terms of fairness imho, would play hell with markets, which would have to make serious adjustments, because people would save differently and invest differently than they do now.
Doug78
Doug78
2 years ago
Instead of gold-backed, why not silver-backed or diamond-backed? Mining precious metals is probably as energy-intensive as mining bitcoin so why not back your money with something that can’t be mined or created such as something like land which is a real asset? 
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
Diamonds can be created by man in a lab and they get subjectively graded. So they can’t be used.
How would you back by land? If someone (say another country) wants to redeem cash for land are you planning to deed them some acreage in the middle of the country? Land is also subject to property taxes.  So land is out too.
Doug78
Doug78
2 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Sure. If you  want to redeem your dollars you might get title to a quarter-acre of scrub in Nevada. Seriously the Federal government owns 28% of all land in the US most of which is far from worthless so it could be used as a real asset to back the currency. As for taxes what better way to back your currency than with something that produces revenue? Early in the Republic the ability to own, sell or rent land was the underpinning of the worth of the early Dollar before industrialization. Land is a hard asset and as Eddie_T knows can produce revenue streams even in a low or no interst rate environment.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  Doug78
The math says an acre would be worth ~35K based on 3 million sq miles (country size) * 664 acres per mile * 28% Fed owned = ~557 million acres. If we use M2 of 20 trillion that means ~35K an acre.
Of course it also means there is no more public land at all since it’s all owned by someone (whom ever has money). Therefore no more public leases for forestry, oil or hunting, fishing, grazing, hiking etc since it’s all private property now. Would we want that as a society? Then would the land ownership come with rights (mineral, fishing etc) or just ownership and you couldn’t do anything with the land (presumably the latter).
Doug78
Doug78
2 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
The government doesn’t have to sell it. It just enough to know that if necessary they could exactly like the with the gold. The 35K average is not bad but imagine how much Camp Pendleton would be worth now? 125,000 acres of prime beachfront in southern California would be worth a lot. Think of the cash flow if you rent it. The Dollar has much more backing than just some gold and good will. 
JimMcHale
JimMcHale
2 years ago
One of your best posts. To the balanced budget amendment I would add, “except in times of DECLARED war”. 
Zardoz
Zardoz
2 years ago
Reply to  JimMcHale
War would get declared every Thursday with such a condition.
PeterF
PeterF
2 years ago
I like a lot of your ideas, although not all. I agree we should eliminate all tax deductions and exemptions, they only help distort the economy and provide opportunities for rich people to game the system.
Doug78
Doug78
2 years ago
Your program has points most people would agree on and points that most people would disagree on. 
Lance Manly
Lance Manly
2 years ago
Are you treating capital gains as ordinary income?
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
The only part that makes no sense is having a gold-backed dollar. Why just gold ? Why not a basket of precious metals including rare earth minerals. Heck why not make it based on a specific rock of your own choosing. The only reason gold is thought to be special is because governments thought it was. These are the same governments that corrupted the money systems across the world.  If you truly want sound money, you have to ban all derivatives first where most money now exists in opaque markets that no one can see. You will get real money valuation and true supply and demand only if this is done. I think we would see at least a 50% drop in all commodity prices and goods prices almost overnight. Imagine a world where you couldn’t drive up the price of something unless you took delivery of it and paid for it. Derivatives markets of all kinds are the ones mostly responsible for inflation and price manipulation of all kinds and driving up the cost of living for most things. 
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
The reason it’s historically been Gold is because it is an element (and thus can’t be created by man) and it’s scarce so there is a stable supply (so it retains value and isn’t easily diluted).
You could definitely use a basket of Silver, Gold, Platinum (all rare elements) but it’s essentially just saying the same thing as using Gold.
Derivatives would automatically stop existing as a consequence of using gold backed money (in the same vein the Fed would cease to exist).
Casual_Observer2020
Casual_Observer2020
2 years ago
I don’t think your proposals are unrealistic at all. You should run for state representative or senator from Utah. It would surely be better than the insurrection Senator Mike Lee  or two of the 4 state reps are still supporting. 
mike09
mike09
2 years ago
No wonder no one likes libertarians. This is why you guys never win, you live in alternate fantasy land.
Mish
Mish
2 years ago
Reply to  mike09
I made a proposal – I never said it had a chance
You see to have a very serious reading comprehension problem
RonJ
RonJ
2 years ago
Reply to  mike09
What alternate fantasy land do you live in? Things are the way they are only because a bunch of people decided to make them that way. The show Mountain Men follows a group of individuals who live off by themselves in the wilderness, away from modern society.
There are two major parties in this country and no one else wins because that is the way they want it. Martin Armstrong recently claimed that the real reason Ross Perot dropped out of the 1992 election was that he was threatened with investigation of his business. Is it true? I don’t know, but look at how Trump was treated as an outsider, along with Sanders.
Sunriver
Sunriver
2 years ago

You will get what you really want Mish. Deflation. The dirty secret of fiat currency, is that it can only subsist with exponentially increasing debt. Fiat is a short term phenomenon and it will implodes upon itself. If humanity does not blow itself up in the fundamental movement towards deflation, the world will finally have a sense of what true asset valuation is. 

shamrock
shamrock
2 years ago
The United States currently has about $500b in gold and a money supply of $20T in approximate numbers.  How do you figure $500b can back $20T?  
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  shamrock
Easy. Divide total amount of money by amount of gold in physical units (tons) to get gold – per – dollar.
And yes this would lead to some crazy things like a $500 gold necklace today being worth millions after Mishs proposal. Hence it’s not realistic it can be done.
whirlaway
whirlaway
2 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
The $500 gold necklace would be valued at $20,000 in such a case?   Not millions of dollars.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  whirlaway
True about 20K.
But I believe the money supply is > 20T when using Mish’s method where every dollar must be backed by gold. That means no fractional reserve lending so all loans and everything else has to be figured into the new currency so 20T may not be enough.
shamrock
shamrock
2 years ago
Reply to  TexasTim65
Ok, but what are the consequences of devaluing the dollar by 98% versus Gold?  I’m having a hard time imagining the chaos.
TexasTim65
TexasTim65
2 years ago
Reply to  shamrock
Huge. It would have to be FDR gold confiscation all over again to make it happen. That’s why even Mish knows it’s not possible.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.