Rip, here in Australia we abolished a whole raft of different sales tax rates at the wholesale level and moved over to a flat 10% sales tax on everything except basic food items at the retail level. Before the 10% sales tax came in we had the type of system you're talking about, different wholesale tax rates for different items, with the "luxury" goods getting the highest rates. That system was scrapped because over time it had become more and more complicated, and more and more difficult to administrate (can you really trust the politicians to keep their hands off it and not mess it up?). Even if the current flat sales tax had included food, there is no way in hell that the revenue raised from from a flat 10% sales tax would be enough to finance government coffers at all levels (fed, state, local). Govt services would have to be cut to the absolute bone (and I mean [B]absolute[/B]).
Some people will say that's probably a good thing, and to be honest I can think of a few areas of govt budget that could do with some serious reductions (The current federal administration here in Australia presented it's budget bill for the upcoming financial year a couple of weeks ago. Welfare soaks up 1/3 of the entire federal budget), but there would be a lot of services that would be so financially crippled that they will cease to function effectively. How many people here are willing to give up public funded education in favour of user pays? Public health care? How much of a cut would the defence budget have to take? Do we want any kind of welfare safety net for the genuinely needy? What about publicly funded infrastructure such as major roads, or do we want to pay tolls on every road we use? Public safety (law enforcement, courts and emergency services)? What level of direct cost to ourselves are we ready to accept for the sake of reducing the level of indirect cost (the tax system)? What effect will a fully user pays public infrastructure system have on the communities we live in?
Also, how many state sales taxes have never risen? In the UK, Canada and New Zealand where they have national sales tax systems, the sales tax rates have all gone up over time.
A more effective way of coming up with an alternative budget would be to look at what services need to be funded from the tax purse, and make everything else user pays. What services do you want to pay for directly and what do you want paid for from taxes? How many other people can you talk into agreeing with you?
10% flat tax through sales tax would only fund a fraction of the current services financed out of the public purse today. A flat sales tax rate of 25% would probably be a more realistic figure if you want to have any hope of abolishing personal income taxation (What about corporate taxes? If you're going to rely on sales turnover to fill the tax coffers, you want as much money circulating through the sales system as possible. Taking a scalpel to corporate taxes would certainly help with that), but over time more and more demands will be placed on the tax purse (unless someone can develop a quantum leap that can deliver public services for a fraction of the current cost) and the politicians won't be able to resist tinkering with the system. With more and more tinkering over time things will end up being just as messed up as they are now. I like to think of it as "political entropy".
Maybe we should all be saving up for our own private islands where we can declare ourselves independent nations.