Examining Ben Carson and Chris Wallace’s Flat Tax Interview

Ben Carson is challenged by Chris Wallace for being a proponent of the flat tax. Ben Carson says he was inspired by the Bible for the flat tax. I like Ben Carson, but I’m not seeing where the Bible supports a flat tax. Like Chris Wallace, I don’t exactly agree with the flat tax, but for totally different reasons. Hear more in this ZoNation!

If you want to help connect conservatism to the culture then we hope you’ll support
our efforts to rock the gospel and Sledge against the liberal pop-culture narrative!
MrT_BG copy 2

Thanks for watching my vids! If you like the message in them then You’ll have a BLAST nukin’ the liberal Narrative with my audio book of Christian Conservalicious profundus, written and read by Me! WEAPON OF A.S.S. DESTRUCTION! CLICK HERE OR IMAGE AND CHECK OUT SOME REVIEWS, AND GET YOUR COPY!!!

Hope you’ll Visit my band’s Facebook page and CLICK LIKE, if you’d like to see more artists who are “One Nation under God patriots” instead of people who just wanna whine with a chip on their shoulder!


  • Phillip Russertt

    as usual you are right on the money:)

  • Kari Lynn Wellborn

    Right on not everyone makes the same amount of money but we ALL make purchases. Taxing “outcome” makes more sense than taxing income.

  • Luke Baldwin

    I can’t get behind a national sales tax, it would just grow a new, inefficient bureaucracy that would further meddle and track what people are buying. Having to deal with state sales taxes you find out quickly how powerful, wasteful and time consuming sales tax collection is; every business and every individual under a national sales tax would further be turned into an unpayed tax collector who would be personally liable to the state. No thanks.

    • M.Roose

      how could a National Sales tax be inefficient? it would be collected at the cash register. Of course there would be black market sales that would be unaccounted for, no different than today. Current businesses have to pay their taxes quarterly to local, state and federal tax agencies, no change there. And yes the tax rate would likely deter consumers, depending on the product and the price. Read up on Fairtax at fairtax.org

  • Bryan Lyman

    Zo, while I agree with what you say 100%, I can understand where Ben is coming from. How did each bad law come to be they way it is currently…the answer is that people didn’t swallow the large poison pill all at once, they were tricked into taking smaller pills while legislators increased the size slowly (kinda how Lucifer does it…or drug dealers). As with all social programs, the idea is to get the people used to the idea that you are a bad person if you want to take away everyone’s conveniences. Taxation is the method to institute all social programs, thus, the only way to feed the addiction is to keep increasing taxes. So what Ben is trying to do is slowly back people off of the drug, if he were to take the drug away all at once, there would be instant backlash. The benefits of LOWERING taxes has always been a hard sell to people because they have to give up a convenience in order to see a long term benefit, but most people want instant results. The only way to demonstrate the benefits of tax reform is to push back slowly against the growing monster and then point out the benefits so people can decide for themselves which solution is better. “…the truth shall set you free.”

    So while I would love to cut the monster (taxes) off at the knees and ram a hot poker through its eye-socket into its brain (no income tax), there will be those stupid innocent people who don’t know any better singing kumbuya and chaining their bodies to the beast so you have to go through them to kill it (revolution).

    What Ben needs, should he become president, is good advisers who can lead him to conclusions that would be beneficial for the country instead of surrounding himself with rich pot smoking hippies from the era of free drugs and sex with a plan to save the people THEIR way “whether the people like it or not” (Obama and most of congress). Ben admitted himself that where he lacked experience, he would seek out the experience of men far smarter than himself to create his cabinet…That would be a lofty goal, since there are not a lot of people smarter than himself; but it is people like you who would make a great adviser, and If I were asked who would be good for a position like that, YOU would be at the top of the list.

  • Laurel

    Sorry Zo but I think you have this one way wrong. Taxes are not solely to implement entitlement programs. I don’t think the military and it’s maintenance is an entitlement for example. In order to have a civilized society we form a government and that requires maintenance in the form of taxation. Taxing outcome is in essence a national sales tax which will unfairly target the poor and grow government and the IRS just in continual maintenance alone. there is more than one philosophical reason behind a flat tax and it has nothing to do with bible distortion.

    I also don’t think people really see the state as an apostle or a God unless they are progressive. Be aware though that while you are complimenting Carson and Teddy Roosevelt, Teddy was a Progressive and in every sense of the term.

  • Sullys Pops

    A consumption tax has been floated around for years but whenever it peaks out, the left smashes it with their extensive media assistance. You want to to know if it is a good idea, just look to the left and do the opposite. I have always been of the mind that a consumption tax would actually level the field for everybody. The left doesn’t like it because they can’t attack the rich, or pander to poor class. You take those two fields of “attack and pander” (I should copyright that phrase lol) take the attack and pander out of the equation then the left will only have, women are being taxed more then men.

    Keep up the excellent work Zo!

  • 4TimesAYear

    Great argument against Carson’s reasoning. I also argue against his reasoning in that only land owners gave a tenth of their produce of the land and livestock. The poor did not tithe. Carpenters did not tithe. Seamstresses and bakers did not tithe. And a flat tax would not be a fair tax. There is a difference between taxing what someone needs to live on and taxing someone’s surplus. The rich gave much – but the widow gave more.

  • wolfman113

    Zo, Ran across your ‘show’ a few months ago. I’m completely enthralled with your knowledge and telling it like it is. Besides Bill Whittle and Andrew Klavan, you are 100% logical and offer people something they can believe in. I can’t fathom why (uniformed) people call you names. If a person speaks the truth and expounds on it, what is there to disagree? Stay strong and walk with Jesus.

  • LibertyChick

    I’d refer either the flat tax or the fair tax over what we have now. Just gotta say, 2 times in my life I have owned a home and paid a mortgage. Both times, I got to deduct the mortgage, and pay no income tax. So for the most part, homeowners carrying a mortgage pay little to no income tax, while renters – most of whom can’t afford to buy – are paying through the nose.

    I don’t get why people with kids get a deduction when so much of the tax money is used to pay for public schools their kids attend. I have not kids so get no deduction and am not using the services.

    I wanted to contribute to my IRA after I retired from the military and wasn’t working. I wasn’t allowed because my pension income is not considered “earned” income. I just want to have enough to pay my way later. When I told my cousin she said “yes, but if you have a cleaning lady you can deduct that”.

    All these tax rules are ridiculous! At this point I’d be game for saying “let’s ditch it, go with a 10% flat tax for 2-4 years with an agreement to go to a fair tax the next 2-4 years, and in the end figure out which option worked better for the people and for the true needs of the government (i.e., not having enough money for the President to fly all over the world to take 5 star vacations, and even separate planes from the first “lady”, but actually meeting the Constitutional needs and commitments of our country). The thing is, when you keep things super simple, changes are easy. The more complicated something is, the harder it is to implement or maintain – case in point, Obamacare: a 1600 page bill should never even be considered as an option for anything!

  • MikeSr

    As always I am impressed by your presentations, Zo. The commenters to your presentations testify to the quality of your visitors.
    The consumption tax (HST) in Canada has been in place for a couple of decades and the Provinces have all but one, jumped in. The benefits for the consumption tax in my observation is 1/. it is a visible tax which is shown on every Sales Receipt. Therefore it has to be announced in a Large way with lot’s of political push-back from the opposition.
    2/. it replaces at the myriad of taxes, normally hidden in the manufacturing process of domestic businesses. Frequently imports receive a free ride which under the consumption tax is created when goods and services are either received at customs and/or at time of invoicing.

    The biggest benefit is not only a much simplified system of gathering the governments share, but! and as always it “Should” reduce the number of bureaucrats. Y’all know the “Stationary Bandit’s” henchmen/henchwomen. Cheers;

  • WileyPost

    The Fair Tax is the only way to go, but unfortunately it needs to be explained to people so they understand it. The mainstream media won’t do this, in fact, they’ll do the opposite and make it sound regressive (which it is not). They only know the talking points fed to them by the stakeholders in the current tax system (lobbyists, IRS, big businesses and the upper class wealthy) . I’m hoping that Huckabee will be able to get this info out, since he supports the Fair Tax.

  • ramrodd

    Flat Tax/Fair Tax is a Progressive wealth re-distribtion and financial scam,
    which is superficially and deceptively marketed..

  • scott

    alfonzo is great.he,d be a great president

  • Taxing outcome… would that be a Value Added Tax? That might be good, if it could legally be fixed to a flat rate that wouldn’t be subject to increase as it gets misspent and wasted.

  • Tatahnka

    Just watched Alfonzo’s video. For those who are confused, especially liberals who see no other way but “progressive” taxation of income, he’s talking about a “consumption tax” whereby your spending is taxed, not your income. What’s more fair than that??

    • Tatahnka

      I would adjust his terminology, though. Instead of “outcome”, use the term “out-go”. Seems more in line with the whole concept of taxation on spending.

Don't miss a thing. Sign up for our email newsletter to get the lastest from Alfonzo Rachel!