A Bleeding Heart Libertarian Bill
During the Porcupine Tribune hiatus, I learned something about myself. It began with what I termed “Radical Indifference,” wherein I became so ambivalent to the wrong-headedness of all sides of debate that I
checked out entirely and angrily. After diving into a good amount of Hayek and the Anti-Federalists, some great conversations with thinkers such as Jessica Flannigan and Gary Chartier, and sufficient time away with my thoughts, I would like to suggest a new bill that is built around the reduction of invasive, leviathan government, the advancement of justice, and the sort of compromise William F. Buckley, Jr. Jr. discusses in his new love letter to Woodrow Wilson (okay, that may be a mischaracterization of a great article). A two-plank bill as sweeping, idealistic, and improbable as the “Green New Deal,” and even with similar aims, but without
calling for big government control and force.
Replace all federal entitlement programs with a universal basic income. Many across the conservative,
libertarian, and even anarchist spectrum more qualified than myself have been moving towards this idea from a variety of angles (see here and here for examples). This would address concerns across all ends of the political spectrum and establishes a more just system of addressing poverty. Among other merits, this would 1) eliminate the degrading and intrusive process of showing one’s underwear to the government, so to speak, in order to receive help, 2) prepare us for the coming decrease in low-skill jobs that will likely follow a more automated society, 3) drastically reduce the overall size and scope of government while offering more streamlined, efficient, and tangible help to those in need, and 4) create a system focused on investment in
the individual as opposed to the forced dependency in place now.
Replace federal income tax with revenue neutral carbon tax. The income tax is unjust. There is no compelling argument authorizing the forced taking of earned income from labor. Further, as taxation is increasingly (for better or for worse), used as a means to disincentivize specific behaviors (“sin taxes”) and to nudge other behaviors (the ACA individual mandate). If this is the accepted purpose of taxation, what, outside of revenue collection, can be inferred by the collection of income taxes? A more just and beneficial solution is replacing the income tax with a carbon tax. This would tax behavior that actually negatively impacts other individuals (you have a right to your property, but not to contaminate my air) instead of positive behavior (thereby allowing individuals to keep their earned money in their pockets). And, while my free market beliefs push me away from governmental nudges of this kind as a rule, it would attack cronyist regulations and encourage, instead, businesses to find tax savings through innovation such as 3D printing over transportation. This, along with deregulation, may also create a demand for other innovations such
self-driving uber fleets and even 3D printed meats.