I find this thread surprising in the level of agreement once the non-germane and cynical remarks are discounted. When considering tax level, the tax equivalent of inflation, i.e., currency devaluation, must be included. On a net basis it seems our tax level in the US is about as high as in the UK and Europe, but we get in return somewhat less than the European's do unless you consider expenditures for armaments and the presence of an impoverished class as an improvement in your standard of living, which i don't. (If you make your livelihood from the military-industrial-complex or serve in the armed forces, i don't expect you'll agree. )
The idea of a national consumption tax replacing the income tax has more and more appeal to me. So long of course as basics such as groceries, utilities, etc. are exempted (there could be caps in some instances) to protect those in the lowest economic strata, who would then actually benefit from such a tax structure.
This,or a flat tax, will, of course, never happen unless we somehow reclaim our original form of representative democracy. And it might not happen regardless, unless we protect and strengthen public education. So it would seem that the very first step toward reform has to be elimination of the lobbyists' main tool, the ability to indirectly influence political campaign outcomes via money and the media. That would require two things: 1. a total ban on any and all contributions to any federal political campaigns, and 2. An elimination of all paid political advertising by any group or individual.
The structure of political campaigns would have to change radically, and the first amendment would have to be modified. But neither of these are impossible. Short of those radical changes i suppose we will just continue to drift in the current direction until there is a crisis, or revolution.
By the way i listened to Ron Paul on C-Span last night and was intrigued by his remedy for out of control healthcare costs, viz., bring back competition into healthcare, which i read as "deregulate". This is something that i have been a strong advocate of for years, but i have never before heard a politician champion this idea. (Perhaps that was the thrust behind the failed Hillary Clinton initiative which the insurance industry so effectively shut down.) Personally, I would much prefer deregulating to socializing medicine. (If Dr. Paul should become a serious candidate, expect the entire medical delivery-insurance industry to come down hard on him!)