Hello, fellow millennials. I am posting this today to explain how exactly libertarian economics are the best for your independence from giant, elderly corporations in terms of how you make money. How fiscally libertarian policies create opportunity for you, the rest of my generation around me, embolden you to be creative about how to work yourselves gradually to being rich people.
Let us begin with explaining how fiscally libertarian tax policies make our generation very able to grow our wealths independently.
Fiscally Libertarian tax policies consist of Minimal Taxing and Non-Tax Revenue.
For explanation purposes, minimal taxing means charging low tax rates, but can also mean charging very few different kinds of tax, or only charging one kind of tax.
I would estimate that 20% and lower percentages constitute low tax rates, nationally. On State-by-State basis and also Locally I would cap it off at 5% and lower.
Of the two most used variants of taxing, income tax and sales tax, I would say sales tax is far superior. Not charging income tax and being minimalist about sales tax means that people are not just incentivized to work better but also to save more money for survival necessities like edibles and attire.
But what about property tax? One might ask. Well, people, property tax is actually what New Hampshire charges as their one and only tax and it is well below 5% at an exact rate of 2%, and refuses to charge any other taxes and seeks to instead rely on Non-tax revenue such as concessions to farmers and breweries and such.
The result is New Hampshire people have the most Fiscal Independence from state level government of any of America’s 50 different state populations. Because New Hampshire is the ultimate minimalist with its taxing. Also people in New Hampshire have the most capacity for self-employment income of any state population. My state of Connecticut is out of control with its taxing and therefore myself and other Connecticut people have the 7th lowest capacity for self-employment according to Cato Institute’s “Freedom in the 50 states” reports, category Fiscal freedom.
Government can easily use non-coercive means of attaining revenue. The most used examples government owns of this are toll booths on roads, the road-building business, and almost every airport you’ll come across. For government to rely on Non-Tax Revenue alone would very likely increase voluntary tourism as people would not have to owe any taxes and would therefore be substantially more able to afford recreational travel. And then government would charge money for toll road use and airport use and for other travel means it might own businesses in.
Another type of non-tax revenue is concessions for royalties. Making deals with small businesses and independent merchants that they can operate anywhere in the world they want as long as they give 20% or smaller share of their profits to the government whose nation they are a citizen of. Or 5% or smaller share to the state or local government they are a citizen under.
Private Sector internet giants like YouTube already do this: allowing users to monetize their videos as long as they allow 45% of their revenue to go to YouTube’s corporate employees.
A Small, simple regulatory burden of 10 to 30 laws across up to eight pages is what’s necessary for a regulatory burden. What we have in the US economy is 87,282 regulations spanning across many hundreds if not thousands of pages.
Lightweight regulatory burden is fiscally libertarian as it keeps the rules for economic acting simple, and straight to the point so everyone from little kids to elderly people can know what they mean. Heavyweight burden leads only to poverty and unemployment.
A very simple set of rules that is designed with human rights in mind is all that’s needed to regulate business to the extent needed for a true free market that is immune to corporatism.
Minimalistic regulatory burden benefits people who wish to prosper on their own as then they will know exactly, in less than half an hour, everything they can and cannot do and have a ton of freedom in terms of how they can conduct their online or other small business. If you have hundreds to thousands of regulations for a regulatory burden, then poor and middle class are forced to go work for some giant business that has been around for longer than the internet has been around for.
Who To Vote For Then?
Basically keep in mind that parties are nothing more than vehicles and vessels and ignore the party affiliations of candidates, firstly. Don’t mind a candidate’s party affiliation until you know full well that their economics are dominated by a free-market, fiscally libertarian economic policy agenda. Why so simple? Well…
Fiscally Marxist candidates may want to make millennials totally independent from giant, elderly companies but Fiscally Marxist policies (high tax rates, huge diversity of tax types, hundreds if not thousands of different rules for how individual merchants can and cannot operate, hundreds to thousands of different legal barriers to global trade) actually force us millennials to work on outdated jobs from the 20th century.
In contrast, Fiscally Libertarians tend to have differing intentions per candidate, on an individual basis. But what is collectively a fact of them is their policies (low tax rates, little to no diversity of tax types, small enough regulatory burden to fit into a personal diary, or an even smaller burden than that) which are the policies of granting our generation the sovereignty to create Digital Age jobs.
Yes, I am that simple in this post. I just wanted to get this off of my brain-stem. This is all I got for now, just a rundown of how fiscal libertarianism embodies the economics my generation urgently needs. Thanks everyone,