Libertarians and Republicans Have Different Goals

It is fairly well understood that libertarians and Republicans (not including the libertarians who are registered as Republicans) are quite different on some issues.  On civil liberties and foreign policy, you could almost say they are opposites.  But it is assumed that Republicans and libertarians are much closer on fiscal issues.  Perhaps this is true in comparison to the Democrats and libertarians, but it should be known that Republicans and libertarians are generally quite different, even on economic and fiscal issues.

I heard a few minutes of Marco Rubio (Republican senator from Florida) on Sean Hannity's radio show.  Hannity asked him about John Boehner (Speaker of the House) and his proposal to raise tax "revenue" by closing so-called loopholes and reducing deductions.  Rubio gave his compliments to Boehner, but said he disagreed with him on how we should increase government revenue.  Rubio said we should do it by generating economic growth and increasing employment.

So while Rubio is not in favor of raising tax rates and is apparently not in favor of reducing deductions, he is saying that he has a goal of increased government revenue (I hate that word in this context) to close the budget deficit.

For radical libertarians, this should be appalling.  Rubio admitted that he wants more money going to the government.  For most libertarians, they want less money going to the government.

I am a defender of the Laffer Curve in that it makes sense that higher income tax rates do not necessarily lead to higher government tax collections.  If you raise the tax rate to 100%, who is going to work?

But I am not a defender of the Laffer Curve when it is used simply for the goal of maximized government tax collections.  I don't want the government to get more money.  I want them to get less.  In fact, there is no evidence that an increase in tax collections would decrease the budget deficit anyway.  The government would probably just spend more, leaving the budget deficit just as big (or even bigger as seen in the Reagan years).

All of this focus on taxes is a major distraction.  There is only a tax problem because there is a spending problem.  If government spending were drastically reduced, then we wouldn't have to worry about high taxes and government "revenue".

It is all about the spending.  As long as the government continues to fund virtually every human activity, then we are paying for it in one way or another.  It is consuming and misallocating resources.  It is making us poorer than we should be.  It will only stop when the American people put a stop to it or there is a major default.  We'll wait and see which happens first.