As I say at the end of the letter, this plan is still worth debating without the windfall pay increase for every wage earner. And there won't be any income or payroll taxes taken out of the new lower salary. And efficiences can cause the amount to rise back up later to everyone's benefit.
The point is that we need to discuss this plan honestly.
I'll be watching this thread closely. Like I said recently, (I think it was to you), the idea that someone comes out ahead after the FairTax is passed isn't really appealing to me. It would be nice, but that's not what I'm looking for.
Transparency in the tax rate, and the perceived pain of the tax burden on each person, is worth more than money. These results will lead to a foundational shift in the minds of the dependency class for the good of America- and it will undo decades of creeping Communist advances.
That's why I favor the FairTax, and I think we agree on this. But yes, it needs to be tested and prodded at every point. No surprises!
I reject the notion that is a new "lower" salary.
That makes sense only for a mind attuned to words like proletariat and the new man.
Thanks.
Please forward to Hannity and have someone read, then explain it to him.
Who (or what law) will force the manufacturers and/or distributors to reduce costs at the retail point?
There is no pay increase. If you make $50,000 a year, your employer pays you 50,000, but he takes part of it and sends it to the government. The cost to him is still $50,000. Under the Fair Tax, the employer pays you $50,000 a year, but instead of sending part of it to the government, he pays it all to you. Where is the pay increase? The taxes you would have paid are paid at the point of sale, instead of being withheld from your check.