The Huffington Post reports that Actor Will Smith “is supporting President Barack Obama’s call for higher taxes on the country’s top earners.” Specifically, the POTUS has called for what is known as the Buffet rule that anyone earning over $1 million a year should have to pay a minimum of 30 percent in tax. In Smith’s case this would be at least $20 million for 2012.

Now, let me leave the insignificance of this number when compared to the deficit or debt and instead posit that nothing precludes Will Smith or any of the 210,000 tax payers whom this affects including the sage of Omaha from making a voluntary contribution today. He should go to https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454 to make his voluntary contribution of $3 million (30 percent of $20 million) to reduce the public debt.

If they are not technically savvy, they can send a check payable to the Bureau of the Public Debt, and in the memo section, notate that it’s a Gift to reduce the Debt Held by the Public and send it to:

Attn Dept G
Bureau of the Public Debt
P. O. Box 2188
Parkersburg, WV 26106-2188

After that he can encourage the rest of the 210,000 to do that same. Once they all do that then the can make any contributions to the Obama campaign.

A Suggestion for Will Smith is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

My thanks to Peter Kim from www.accountingdegreeonline.net for sharing this infographic with me and allowing me to share it online.

Created by: Accounting Degree Online

How Your Tax Dollars Are Spent is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

I wish I was this smart. Author unknown.

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100…

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7..
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that’s what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,"but he got $10!"

"Yeah, that’s right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That’s true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

On Beer and Taxes is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

An article this week by Chris Kirkham in the Huffington Post analyzes the merits of states privatizing their prisons in an attempt to control costs. It is an excellent piece that is truly a balanced view of the situation.

There is, however, one thing wrong with the article – it is concerned with a symptom, not the cause of the problem.

As Kirkham notes, “In exchange, the company (which is looking to run a prison) is asking for a 20-year management contract, plus an assurance that the prison would remain at least 90 percent full.” (Emphasis mine.)

Just how do states plan to do that? Easy, by putting the majority of people in prison for non-violet crimes.

According to a Center for Economic and Policy Research 2010 report, more the 60 percent of those in prison are there on non-violent offenses. Another study from the Vera Institute estimates that Texas spends about $3.3 billion per year for adult corrections and prisons. That is $125 per person in Texas.

In Austin, I would move to strike down laws against non-violent offenses. If this eliminates 50 percent of the prison budget we could save $1.6 billion per year. Of course, this does not count the reduced burden on law enforcement at both the state and local level.

We are out of money! We need to rethink who really should and should not be incarcerated. It is time to wake up!

Privatize Prisons? Not the real issue is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

While there is much talk in the Texas media about the budget shortfall of $21 billion. I think the more important issue is the unfunded liability of $193 billion (and rising every year.) This is according to the National Center for Policy Analysis, Policy Report No. 329 by Courtney Collins and Andrew J. Rettenmaier, published July 2010.

I am no math whiz but this means that every child born in the state of Texas this year is already in debt to the tune of $7,720. Texas is in the middle of the pack compared to other states, but we are quickly headed in the direction of California where this has become the biggest problem plaguing the Golden State.

It is so bad the even Democrats such as Willie Brown are beginning to rethink what needs to be done. Why? Because it is impacting their ability to get other progressive laws passed.

If I do nothing in this campaign but continue to bring this to the attention of Texans, my campaign will be a success. When this becomes an issue about five years hence, please remember you read it hear first.

Here is a video about the problem in California from reason.tv.

On Unfunded Liabilities is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

Last night at the candidate forum sponsored by the Allen Area Patriots, one questioner inquired about my source for Texas being listed 31st as a state in economic freedom. My answer was the Pacific Research Institute.

With pleasure I present a video about this terrific organization.

Click this sentence if you are interested in reading the full U.S. Economic Freedom Index for 2008.

On the Pacific Research Institute is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

This classic strip appeared in the papers on a couple of Sundays ago.

If you are truly looking for a smaller government, you must consider voting Libertarian. As Libertarian Party executive director Wes Benedict said:

Republicans are trying to fool you again. There are two kinds of Tea Partiers. One kind is so blinded by its hatred of Obama and Democrats that it cannot see fault with Republicans.

Libertarians have much in common with Tea Party goals of reducing government spending and taxes. While many Tea Party supporters will admit that George W. Bush’s administration grew government, Libertarians want to remind Tea Partiers about previous Republican administrations that loved big government.

Republican Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America promised to eliminate the Departments of Education and Energy. Yet once Republicans took control of Congress, they failed even to reduce the spending on those departments.

Republican President George Bush, Sr. remains famous for coining the phrase ‘Read my lips, no new taxes,’ and then raising taxes.

Republican President Ronald Reagan grew federal government spending to the highest level it had reached since World War II. He also ‘saved Social Security’ by raising payroll taxes.

Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole was a huge supporter of taxpayer subsidies for corn and ethanol.

In 1971, Republican President Richard Nixon instituted wage and price controls. That made a group of free-market supporters so angry that they decided to form the Libertarian Party.

Republicans seem to think we’re idiots. For decades they have paid lip-service to shrinking government, while consistently doing the opposite in office.

Our fear is that Tea Partiers might say ‘This time it will be different.’ No it won’t. If you vote for Republicans this time, it will just reinforce the message that they can lie to you and grow government with impunity.

Current Republicans are just as bad as past Republicans. This year, Libertarian Party co-founder David Nolan is running for U.S. Senate against Republican John McCain, who famously suspended his 2008 presidential campaign so he could rush back to Washington to bail out the banks.

Republican leader John Boehner might end up as the next House Speaker, and he voted for George W. Bush’s huge 2003 Medicare expansion.

John Cornyn, Republican senator from Texas, and current chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, voted for the TARP bailouts.

Reason 1 Why Republicans Should Consider Voting for Me is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

This came across my desk today from multiple sources, so I will give thanks to the first person who sent it to me, my friend and Libertarian Candidate for US Congress for District 4, Jim Prindle.

According to a study on the economic freedom of the States published by the Pacific Research Institute,  Texas has fallen from 8th most free to 31st most free on the list.

Worse still is that we are second most regulated state in the union. If elected, I will everything I can to reverse this trend. We are quickly on the way to becoming the next California or New York.

It is time to wake up!

Click the image to learn more about the report.

“Austin, We Have a Problem!” is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

In the past two days, I have come across a few videos that provide some excellent and cogent commentary on issues of import.

In the first, Jeff Miron and Mary O’Grady crystallize the problem with the “war” on drugs. It is interesting to note that many people who are pro-WOD are pro-WOT (“war” on terror), yet it is clear the one funds the other. Drug money, without question, funds terrorist organizations.

In the second, Steve Wynn eloquently explains  how the health care legislation and bailouts will have the exact opposite effect from what their sponsors in Congress intend.

Again, politicians are not evil, they truly intend to try to help, but the do not understand basic economics.

For your viewing pleasure is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.

A recent email exchange with my advisor, David Hall, led to some thoughts on what is and ought to be a fair and rational taxation system for the State of Texas.

We agreed that a consumption tax is without question the fairest way to assess and collect taxes. If elected I would move to eliminate all other forms of taxation and propose an amendment to the Texas Constitution that would limit the tax to no more than 10%.

The State of Texas, indeed all governments should, can, and eventually must live within their means.  Ten percent, I believe, is a most reasonable number.  As the great Ray Stevens song says, “If 10 percent is good enough for Jesus, it oughta be enough for Uncle Sam,” or in this case the State of Texas. Even God only asked for 10%, and that is a great example for us, since people can only bear a reasonable burden.  We can do this by:

1. Eliminating so called “economic development” tax perks at the local and state levels. Since we would be eliminating all other taxes, those incentives would no longer by necessary since reducing the taxes for everyone will be incentive enough.
2. Releasing non-violent offenders from jails and prisons providing ankle bracelets and supervision. Violent offenders would remain incarcerated.  Releasing the non-violent offenders will reduce costs from $60 per day to $6 per day.
3. Eliminating expenses required to calculate, collect, and administer all other taxes.
4. Funding education through a voucher system where the money goes with the students rather than only to public schools, colleges, and universities.
5. Expanding toll roads with the provision that frontage roads have the same number of lanes as the toll way. Also, these must be created through limited use of eminent domain, and where this is not possible, a premium of 25 percent should be paid to property owners on top of fair market value.
6. Closing the loopholes in the sales tax except for food and medicine.
7. Establishing the 200 mile offshore limit instead of the current 10 mile limit for Texas.  This has the potential of increasing our offshore revenue more than 20 times.  Currently, other states have only a two mile limit with the exception of Florida in the Gulf of Mexico.

There are certainly other ideas for improving the Texas economy, and I welcome them, but I believe these would be some of the best places to start. What are your suggestions?

A Rational Tax Proposal is a post from: Elect Ed Kless. Please click to view any multimedia content and/or comment on this post. Thanks.