Forget Boston.....I'm having my own Tea Party

DirtBag · 10-23-2006, 11:14 PM

Sorry, folks for having been flying under the radar. I have been a tad busy researching how to get a Political Party off the ground. I am so fed up with the absolute crap coming from both parties that I thought to myself, "There must be an intelligent centrist alternative party that caters to the vast majority of us rational individuals in the middle." I have still yet to find it, so I'm not wasting any more time. Being the pebble at the leading edge of the landslide, I am starting my own centrist party. By my rough calculations 20% of the populace is steering this country either to the right or to the left. That leaves the 80% of us a rational adults (adult I believe being the operative word) pretty squarely in the middle. A little to the left or the right of center, but willing to negotiate on issues we care about. That 80% is my target audience.

I will be hit and miss here probably through the end of the year as I iron out some issues relative to platform, etc... plus the need to launch a website, file forms, etc... I need to really crank things up, because it is my intention to field a candidate in the 2008 election cycle.

Right now I am playing with "The American Tea Party" or "T.E.A.Party (The Every American Party (signaling inclusiveness)" as party names, because "Dirtbag" Party just doesn't leave you with warm fuzzies. Let me know what you think about the name and I'll bounce platform ideas off you as I develop them. The long and short is that the party will aim to be Socially Liberal but Fiscally Conservative.

**Dragoness_Cutie** · 10-24-2006, 05:37 AM

T.E.A. Party sounds like a good name for it. I look forward to hearing your platform ideas.

*G_Man* · 10-24-2006, 06:21 AM

Quoting: Dragoness_Cutie

T.E.A. Party sounds like a good name for it. I look forward to hearing your platform ideas.

That is my initial thought, too. Although having "American" more prominent might be a good strategy...

*firmly entrenches ideas in mind for more subconscious thought during route*

Thanks, DirtBag... will be thinking hard about this today.

My Second Job

**Sp00k** · 10-24-2006, 07:52 AM

Welcome back Dirtbag and I wish you every success on your political endeavours. Catchy name too...I'll drink to that, tea of course.

**Noodles** · 10-24-2006, 10:55 AM

This is very interesting and I eagerly await more info.

I really like the initiative going on with you DB.

Rhiannon · 10-24-2006, 06:46 PM

I agree with Noodles...
I am very interested in this. I give the name some thought. I agree with G that "American" needs to be more dominate. Can't wait for more info. I was watching TV...I believe it was meet the press and they were discussing with political strategists from both the Democrats and the Republicans and both agree that there would be a new third party to rise by the 08 elections, because the middle America (those between the extremes you mentioned) are fed up with what we have. When asked where they thought this new party would come from...they both agreed the the internet would be the catalyst.

DirtBag · 10-24-2006, 09:53 PM

Okay. "The American Tea Party" is a strong contender.

Given the Historical Nature of a "Tea Party" in America Platform Issue Number 1 will be: Tax Code Reform.

Quite simply the Flat Tax is the only equitable form of any tax. The only taxes the Federal Government would collect would be from income and payroll sources.

Individuals would pay 15% of their gross income to the Federal Government. Indiviuals would be required to provide payroll records to the Revenue Service.

Entities would pay 10% of their gross incomes to the Federal Government.
Entities would be required to provide income statements and payroll records to the Revenue Service.

Why a lower tax rate for entities than individuals? Largely because individuals take more form the system than enteties do, also it is a way to encourage growth.

Neither Income NOR Payroll taxes could be taxed BELOW the Federal Level.

No Tax may be levied more than once by any taxing agency or combination of agencies at any level. Therfore you would not pay sales, income, property or any other tax to more than one taxing agency. (No more Federal, State, County and City income taxes)

I am tempted to throw in a "combined taxes may not exceed x%" but you would start to tread on States Rights. I'm big on States Rights. However in relation to double dipping from the Citizenry, I have to say NO!

jedi · 10-24-2006, 09:59 PM

how would your tax system work for enlisted/military personnel?

*G_Man* · 10-24-2006, 10:24 PM

Quoting: DirtBag

Okay. "The American Tea Party" is a strong contender.

Given the Historical Nature of a "Tea Party" in America Platform Issue Number 1 will be: Tax Code Reform.

Quite simply the Flat Tax is the only equitable form of any tax. The only taxes the Federal Government would collect would be from income and payroll sources.

Individuals would pay 15% of their gross income to the Federal Government. Indiviuals would be required to provide payroll records to the Revenue Service.

Entities would pay 10% of their gross incomes to the Federal Government.
Entities would be required to provide income statements and payroll records to the Revenue Service.

Why a lower tax rate for entities than individuals? Largely because individuals take more form the system than enteties do, also it is a way to encourage growth.

Neither Income NOR Payroll taxes could be taxed BELOW the Federal Level.

No Tax may be levied more than once by any taxing agency or combination of agencies at any level. Therfore you would not pay sales, income, property or any other tax to more than one taxing agency. (No more Federal, State, County and City income taxes)

I am tempted to throw in a "combined taxes may not exceed x%" but you would start to tread on States Rights. I'm big on States Rights. However in relation to double dipping from the Citizenry, I have to say NO!

Wow...

I already disagree, 100%

Flat tax is not fair. Unless you completely eliminate all deductions and tax all forms of income equally...

You want fair tax? Consumption Tax. Period.

I don't care if you make a grand or 10 million dollars. If you tax spent money then the money doesn't do any good unless it is taxed. Also, bigger spenders would actually contribute more to the system. Someone who pays $1000 tax on a $4000 vehicle contributes his share, just a Jay Leno would have to pay $100,000 in taxes to pay for his precious Ford GT. Doesn't matter if the money came from earnings, dividends, or from drug deals. Taxed at the counter.

Here is the real beauty of this. Want to perk your CEO with a company car? Go for it... but you'll pay taxes at the counter, instead of buying the CEO a car for company use, where the company deducts the value of the car and the CEO saves the expense of buying a car.

Babbaloo could probably better estole the benifits of Consumption Taxes.

My Second Job

DirtBag · 10-24-2006, 10:30 PM

Platform Issue Number 2 will be: Campaign Finance and Election Reform.

"Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth." ---Abraham Lincoln

To that end, elimination of all Special Interest/Lobby/PAC monies in American politics. A governor should be beholden to noone except the constituency.

Downward revision of campaign donations to a MAXIMUM of $1,000.00 per candidate/office/elective cycle. This includes the elimination of the ability to donate to more than one candidate per office.

Also, maximum donation of $1,000.00/Political Party/Year. This includes the elimination of the ability to contribute to more than one Political Party per year.

Elimination of any and all out of state or out of country monies, except by legal citizen who is a legal occupant of the voting district AND who is registered to vote within that district. This includes the elimination of establishing multiple occupancies and multiple vote as well as the establishment of a central voter registration, maintained by National Security, swept 4 times a day for updates to ensure against voter fraud in national elections.

Expansion of Congress. Establishes a more representative Congress. Size to be determined. Thomas Jefferson recommended 1 Representative for every 50,000 citizens. The House at that rate would have 6,000 members. Not un-do-able. This expansion would neccessitate relocation. Startegically, moving the Capitol to the Midwest might not be a bad idea anyway. Something to ponder.

Combined these will help to establish a more truly representative government.

DirtBag · 10-24-2006, 11:06 PM

Platform Issue Number 3 will be: Military reform

This will include, upon cessation of action in Iraq, Afghanistan and potentially Iran, the immediate standing down of the standing Army and conversion to Ready Reserves status.

While this may sound radical, it is as the founding fathers intended. We were never supposed to have a Standing Army. This is not to say that we won't be able to defend ourselves. There will always be a "Make Ready Force" on Active Duty. Maintained Readiness means that the Ready Reserve Component must be capable of Mustering within 8 hours, Activating for Full Combat Action within 24 hours and ready for full Inter-Continental Deployment within 7 days. Special Teams may have higher requirements. However, this is to say, "Mr. President, Members of Congress, you can't go committing troops on a whim."

In addition, streamlining the military is neccessary. Elimination of unnecessarily redundant components and services would be a must.

The Coast Guard would be absorbed by the Navy. The Marine Corps would be absorbed by the Army. Naval Aviation would be Absorbed into the Air Force. Like with like. The National Guard would be absorbed by the Reserves. The Coast Guard, Marines and Naval Aviation may be maintained as "Special Operations Groups" but as components un to themselves they will be eliminated. They will also be far more integrated to ensure cohesiveness.

The Reserve committment would increase to 1 weekend/mo. and 4 weeks/yr. With 8 weeks refresher training every 2 years.

Military Pay would increase to that of equivalanet GS-Grades.

The ability to commit troops to any type of combat abroad would remain in the hands of Congress and both houses must be in total agreement. Congress would authorize action, the President would give the order to action. The ability to commit troops to defensive combat domestically would lie in the hands of the President. Likewise the ability to mobilize and commit troops to repel invasions, large scale evacuations and rescue efforts would lie in the hands of the President.

Each State would have a Reserve Contigent within it's borders. However, it would not be at the direction of any state official to include Federal Senators or Congresspersons.

Each State would be allowed to form it's own milita, the scope and training of which would be defensive, policing and rescue training only.

A State Militia, unlike the current situation with the National Guard, could not be deployed overseas for any reason. This would retain a certain degree of readiness at home at all times.

DirtBag · 10-24-2006, 11:24 PM

I apologize for failing to mention that any and all deductions would be eliminated. Likewise, though, no capital gains or estate taxes. That should offset the "I'm taxed more because I earn more" argument.

While I agree that a consumption tax is theoretically more equitable, realistically the end result is largely the same in both systems.

You pay more because you either earn OR spend more, even though the tax rate is the same, than us paeons at the lower end of the economic spectrum.

The only other alternative would be an Absolute Tax. You would pay the same regardless of your income.

Remember though that this speaks ONLY to a Federal Tax and aims to avoid redundant taxation on same monies by multiple levels of Government. I would rather see Consumption Tax at the State Level rather than the Federal Level.

Income/Payroll tax at the Federal Level would eliminate same at lower levels.

The way I am proposing you would pretty much be filling out a Post Card to file your taxes.

Bear in mind that I am not inflexible on these Platform Positions. These are rough ideas that need development and definition.

DirtBag · 10-24-2006, 11:52 PM

The same as for everyone else. Read my proposal for the military. Pay would increase significantly. Of course there would be other less well received changes as well, however they lend to the Socially Liberal/Fiscally Conservative position I'm generally trying to take.

As always, the points are just ideas I've put alot of though into that I'm throwing out for you guys to contemplate. I am not inflexible in most everything. If you have a better suggestion I'll run with it. I'm not setting out on a "I have all the good ideas" campaign. I just have ideas. Some are good, some maybe not so good. Give me feedback. However, bear in mind that my signature isn't neccesarily sexual in nature. A good Dr. Evil laugh should follow that last sentence.