http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world Switzerland and Hong Kong would be closest....
I don't think it's possible. The public would have to become knowledgeable enough that they could DEMAND the switch... can't see that ever happening. Government likes the simplicity and control of "A"... can't see them giving it up without a fight. The only way to get rid of "A" historically is for the entire system to collapse and start over... like the former USSR. Nearly all Americans would be bankrupted by a "collapse and start over"..
True.... Until the INTERNET.... The INTERNET may yet have it's day.... It is the "most possible" option.... ..................................................................... The other possibility.... To have a "good speaker" deliver the message.... ie Fox, Bloomberg, CNBC, CNN, CSPAN....THE MEDIA.... ............................................................. Do note "The World of Chavez"... http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aOyhHPl6kzM0
Oh HELL yes... NObama won the election with a deceptive "wind song"... promising "free ice cream". Ron Paul tried to deliver the right message, but never got enough support. By the time we recognize what a horrible choice it was to elect The Poser, the Gummint will have its head so far up everybody's butt we'll be able to taste the Brylcream!
IMO many if not most voters don't want to know the truth. Hence the reason anyone telling it can't get any political traction. The electorate would rather engage in their favorite escapism or entertainment (sports, celebrity worship, "reality" TV, game shows...) while someone else deals with the issues and reality. I'm afraid by the time enough citizens, to make any difference, realize they are going to have to get their hands dirty to save our country. There won't be anything left to save. Again, I hope I'm wrong.
The public won't "get it" until we run out of "other people's money"... at which time we'll all be equal and everybody will have the same.... NADA... and THEN the people will understand the saying... "With Capitalism there is unequal sharing of the wealth. With Socialism there is equal sharing of the misery." It's interesting... a non-governed society (such as we first had when America was being colonized) would not STAND for a government of Socialism... "Give a large part of what you earn and produce to the government so they can distribute the benefits of your success "fairly" among the populace"? Yeah, like THAT would fly... It's only after there has BEEN CAPITALISM... where some have produced and accumulated large amounts... that Socialism can take over. Prior to that, there isn't anything to distribute. The Government doesn't "owe people a living"... and we people should not look to them for ours.
And in order to do that you allow the interest on the purchase of capital equipment to be written-off immediately instead of over the life of the equipment. Ever wonder why the financial service industry has grown so much over the last 20 years? It's because they are allowed to write-off interest, immediately. Basic Econ. 101A
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the worldâs greatest civilizations has been 200 years." Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747â1813)
Agree with OP. The country has made at least two epic wrong turns. When housing began to heat up unreasonably the Fed should have started raising rates. Instead they eased. At the precise moment the government should reduce taxation and spending it instead expands dramatically and introduces a parasitic load to the whole system.