[econjack]

I've read the Beck's first book on the Fair Tax, and I understand the economics behind it fairly well (I have a Ph.D. in economics and taught at the university level until a few years ago when I retired). Still, the Prebate (not rebate) allows the Congress to determine that amount. I don't care if it is uniform or not, it still represents a payment to an unproductive segment of the economy, the amount of which, Congress can set. Unless that provision is tightened up, I would prefer a flat tax over the Fair Tax. For those people who cannot work and truly do need relief, I would rather see it come from private charities and the church, like it used to, rather than have my tax dollars used for it. That way, I can directly support the charities that I think actually do some good for the poor, rather than a simple handout.

[Hostage]

From my reading of the legislation, it is not Congress that ‘determines’ the Rebate/Prebate amount (Rebate or Prebate is semantics; it started with Rebate), rather it is DHHS that determines the poverty rate of which 23% is the Rebate, presently about $196 a month per person.

What Congress determines is the NRST rate which starts at 23% and is adjusted each year by vote. The NRST rate is applied to the poverty rate set by DHHS to determine the Rebate.

The Rebate is not welfare as you seem to imply. It is what it is, a credit of taxes up to the poverty line (starting first year at 23% of the poverty line of $10,226 annual per person). This simply means the poor will not be taxed. It does not give dollars away to those that haven’t spent them already. Actually, that’s not 100% correct. There will be persons making less that the poverty line of $10,226 who will receive $196 per month, BUT such persons are a small number and the total dollars they receive in excess are miniscule. I calculated it earlier this year but it is something like .01% of persons will actually receive more Rebate that they should otherwise and the amount will be something on the order of $40 per month. It’s not worth torpedoing historic tax reform over.

Boortz’ book is populist and does not go far enough in depth as to the history and social ramifications. Glad to converse with a fellow doctorate. I have a PhD in Statistics.

But I am disappointed you are in favor of a flat tax as I tried to convey just why the Flat Tax is entirely wrong as it was the progenitor of today’s Income tax. I would suggest you reread my lengthy previous post about the Flat Tax.

Also be aware that the Flat Tax has very little support in Congress, very little. The FairTax has more than ten times the support in Congress and is the largest tax reform movement in Congress today. Those members in Congress in support of the FairTax and their staffs are not clueless. They understand the incredible advantages of the FairTax system.

Huckabee was a Flat Taxer unti he saw the light and came to the FairTax. No matter what is thought about him, he is not an ignorant man.

As an PhD economist I would think you would have read beyond Boortz and into academic discussions about the FairTax.