I think that we can all agree that Republicans hate taxes. No matter how deep into the red we go, we can always rest assured that they will raid Social Security or cut vital programs before increasing taxes. So when I read something like this [Warning: Drudge link], I'm tempted to believe it in spite of the source.

A domestic centerpiece of the Bush/GOP agenda for a second Bush term is getting rid of the Internal Revenue Service, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

The Speaker of the House will push for replacing the nation's current tax system with a national sales tax or a value added tax, Hill sources tell DRUDGE.

"People ask me if I’m really calling for the elimination of the IRS, and I say I think that’s a great thing to do for future generations of Americans," Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert explains in his new book, to be released on Wednesday.

"Pushing reform legislation will be difficult. Change of any sort seldom comes easy. But these changes are critical to our economic vitality and our economic security abroad," Hastert declares in SPEAKER: LESSONS FROM FORTY YEARS IN COACHING AND POLITICS.

"“If you own property, stock, or, say, one hundred acres of farmland and tax time is approaching, you don’t want to make a mistake, so you’re almost obliged to go to a certified public accountant, tax preparer, or tax attorney to help you file a correct return. That costs a lot of money. Now multiply the amount you have to pay by the total number of people who are in the same boat. You can’t. No one can because precise numbers don’t exist. But we can stipulate that we’re talking about a huge amount. Now consider that a flat tax, national sales tax, or VAT would not only eliminate the need to do this, it could also eliminate the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) itself and make the process of paying taxes much easier."

"By adopting a VAT, sales tax, or some other alternative, we could begin to change productivity. If you can do that, you can change gross national product and start growing the economy. You could double the economy over the next fifteen years. All of a sudden, the problem of what future generations owe in Social Security and Medicare won’t be so daunting anymore. The answer is to grow the economy, and the key to doing that is making sure we have a tax system that attracts capital and builds incentives to keep it here instead of forcing it out to other nations."

Now, I seriously doubt that anyone is going to eliminate the IRS, if for no other reason than it would destroy a good conservative boogeyman. But at this point, nothing really surprises me anymore. If Drudge and Hastert get positive responses out of this trial balloon, Bush is going to run with it.

I think most of us can agree that Hastert's plan isn't a good idea. The alternatives to the current tax system (VAT, sales tax, flat tax) almost invariably harm the poor, and none of them would allow for the dismantling of the IRS. But even if they did, destroying the IRS would have a negative effect on the economy. It would eliminate thousands of jobs, and not just government jobs; there are the accountants and attorneys that Hastert mentioned.

Here's the problem. Many people (particularly farmers and ranchers) just don't realize how much the government does for them. That's how we end up with the "givers and takers" conundrum.

I think I may have a solution.

Most of you have probably heard about the libertarian project to "liberate" a state by moving there en masse, voting their members into office and turning the state into some sort of libertarian paradise. I think we should facilitate them. Here's why; one of the benefits of having both federal and state governments is the ability to experiment on a local level. We can try out new laws and concepts, and if they don't work, we've only messed up one state and not the entire union.

Here's what we do: we give one state to the libertarians. It doesn't matter which state, but for the sake of argument, let's say Wyoming. We give an allowance to anyone in Wyoming who wants to move, but it's a deep red state and I bet that quite a few people will want to stay. Once everyone is moved and settled, we cut Wyoming off from the federal government. They pay no federal taxes at all, and they receive no benefits from the federal government. They can, of course, gather taxes on a local level using any of the previously mentioned alternatives. They can also petition the U.S. Government for help, although that would cast some doubt on their plan. We let the whole thing stew for a year, then we go into Wyoming and see how things turned out.