Posted on 07/30/2013 7:57:28 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
House Speaker John Boehner has already thrown a wrench into President Barack Obama's latest "grand bargain" offer — just a few hours after details of it began trickling out, and just five hours before Obama is set to deliver a speech detailing the plan in Tennessee. The gist of Obama's grand bargain is a plan to cut the corporate tax rate, while using billions of dollars in revenue generated in business tax overhaul to fund a job-creation program.
In a statement, Boehner spokesman Michael Steel shot down the idea, marveling that it left small businesses "and American families behind."
"The President has always supported corporate tax reform. Republicans want to help families and small businesses, too," Steel said. "This proposal allows President Obama to support President Obama's position on taxes and President Obama's position on spending, while leaving small businesses and American families behind."
A House GOP leadership aide explained that Republicans have advocated corporate tax reform being paried with individual tax reform. Cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% while leaving the top individual rate at 39.6%, the aide said, would have a "devastating" effect on small businesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Let me put it this way to Boehner and 0bama...
After all the spending and redistributive policies of the regime...a minuscule tax cut to businesses now ...won’t improve the economy.
The result for 2014?
The democrats can say...”see 0bama did that and it failed. It shows the republican philosophy doesn’t work.”
Are we crazy?
Nope not at all.
We’re just aware of being fooled once, twice...and we’re not going to say ‘shame on me’ for a third time.
Boehner is untrustworthy and as such should be removed from office ...even if he is like a stopped clock.
We rage about nothing, pretend that everything that is done is betrayal, and wonder why we lose.
Stupid. Just plain stupid.
No plan, just rage, just stupid.
It is not going to be enough money in pockets with all of 0bama’s redistributive programs.
Then the democrats can say in 2014 the idea of cutting taxes to increase revenue doesn’t work.
What good is a tax cut ...when it gets taken away by some other entity in some other scheme like 0bamacare.
No, this Grand Bargain is a trap for the republican party and conservatives. It is a bit of slight of hand and it amazes me that FReepers here don’t see the forest for the trees on this.
Then we disagree, but we’re not stupid, we just see the chessboard differently.
This is a political checkmate move by 0bama.
He’ll do this and it won’t create jobs...watch.
Business has been so far down that jobs won’t be created. The money will just go to pay for healthcare etc. It won’t generate jobs.
Hence, it hands 2014 to the democrats.
Political checkmate?
A recycled yawner of an idea is some kind of checkmate?
It's so bad, Boehner didn't even wait for the speech to say it was DOA.
And sorry, the posts ARE stupid and ignorant, raging at nothing. If you think that's a good thing, I guess we do see things differently.
“cut the corporate tax rate, while using billions of dollars in revenue generated in business tax overhaul to fund a job-creation program.”
So the net result in increased taxes we end up paying as further “tribute” to Obama.
The FairTax movement is the largest tax reform movement in Congress and in the nation today. There are no lies about the rate. In fact it is a lie to call those that support the FairTax liars. They are truth tellers and the kind of people that I like to have around.
The NRST rate is stated two ways on a receipt, inclusive and exclusive. Income tax rates are stated inclusively, hence the FairTax rate is often quoted inclusively for comparison purposes.
The difference between inclusive and exclusive is one of arithmetic in the denominator. Simply put, given 4 items, if I take away 1 from the four, then I have reduced the total by 25%. Then if given 3 items and I add 1 to this total of 3, I have increased the total by 33%. In the first calculation I use a denominator of 4 and this is the inclusive form. In the second example I use a denominator of 3, and this is the exclusive form.
Complaints about too many taxes are legitimate but the FairTax is not an additional tax, it is a 'replacement' tax to replace the federal income tax and it is applied only to retail products and services, never to business to business transactions nor to used item transactions.
There is already a black market in cigarettes and alcohol because of a lower rate than the Fare Tax would assess, but instead of answering the argument with content you chose to portray my position falsely.
What position? What argument? The IRS will be abolished and state tax collection agencies will collect the NRST, just as they did before the 16th Amendment. You seem to have a real misapplied animus towards the FairTax.
As for enforcement, the FairTax is orders of magnitude more efficient than the Income tax. First, it ***takes two*** people to cheat under the FairTax, a buyer and a seller. Whereas under the Income tax it ***takes only one*** person in secret to cheat. One can say absurdly that cheating under the FairTax will be less efficient.
Second, more than 70% of all retail transactions are carried out by about 3000 corporate chains. And these corporate chains are electronic. It is then so much easier for state tax enforcers to audit an enormous block of retail transactions than it is to audit the books under the income tax code.
"If the income tax went back to 1% (which was the original rate) would you really be bitching about it now?"
I don't need to be the target of your foul mouth.
There have been several flat income taxes in US history beginning with the 1% in 1861 under Lincoln. Income tax proponents always start with the innocent 1% and claim that it will barely be noted in the general population. But history shows that a flat tax never stays flat.
"The problem is spending."
No, it is not 'the' problem, it is 'a' problem. And it is a totally separate problem that can only be helped by the FairTax because of the transparency of the FairTax.
Please be sure to wake me up when Utopia happens.
Great. But part of that has to be to send home all invaders, so the American jobs go to US citizens. There's no getting around it, as evidenced by the reaction when Rubio traitored us. A real lot of constitutional conservatives won't vote for anyone who doesn't insist on invaders being sent home and kept out of the US.
For the first 137 years of my country’s history, there was no IRS. I’m sure that most would agree that the USA was not a utopia during this part of its history.
For at least the last 33 years of your country’s history, that is since Reagan, there has been (talk of) ‘tax reform’. Please kindly list its achievements.
Since the appearance of Boortz' book, Fair Taxers have bandied a 23% rate while admitting the truth in fine print. The citations to that effect are in the link I provided you. The truth is that it is 23% of the total with the tax included. That's a 30% rate on the sale price. Add the sales taxes I pay here and it's 39%.
The von Mises Institute called it a lie too. You call them an enemy of liberty?
The IRS will be abolished and state tax collection agencies will collect the NRST, just as they did before the 16th Amendment.
No it won't. Somebody will have to enforce collections.
As for enforcement, the FairTax is orders of magnitude more efficient than the Income tax. First, it ***takes two*** people to cheat under the FairTax, a buyer and a seller.
It also makes convictions of cheaters more problematic, because they'll support each others stories. Moreover, without a Federal income tax the States will likely drop their State income taxes and either hike property taxes or add to the sales tax. To replace a 12% income tax in California with a sales tax would push the total sales tax with NRST to somewhere near 50%. Hence, because of the amount of money involved, and because of the difficulty in collecting from private parties, the enforcement scheme will have to be more draconian and invasive than it is now, not just once a year.
And at that 50% rate, you think NRST will sell? And you think people won't cheat in droves? If massive numbers of people cheat, you think there won't be an intrusive IRS tracking EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION to get their cut? That's so unrealistic as to be flamingly dishonest.
Second, more than 70% of all retail transactions are carried out by about 3000 corporate chains.
And you think that won't change? You think Federal, State, and local governments won't go after that 50% with a vengeance by forcing individuals to abide by the same reporting standards as "forced" upon corporations? Get real. Loading sole proprietors with the same bureaucratic "reporting" and "compliance" requirements as the big guys can handle easily has been the game in every other form of regulation for nearly a century.
No, it is not 'the' problem, it is 'a' problem. And it is a totally separate problem that can only be helped by the FairTax because of the transparency of the FairTax.
Nonsense. With 30% of all transactions in private, the cost of that "transparency" will be a police state like we've never seen. You're in fantasy land.
I’m not listing anything that has to do with the Income tax.
You can make a list for yourself because I have nothing to do with Income tax reform.
I only deal with tax reform by the FairTax:
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=FAQs
And you also need to subtract the income tax you will be paying because you won't be paying it anymore. And you will also not be paying the federal taxes that are embedded in the retail items.
The von Mises Institute called it a lie too. You call them an enemy of liberty?
Send me a link and a name.
The IRS will be abolished and state tax collection agencies will collect the NRST, just as they did before the 16th Amendment.
No it won't. Somebody will have to enforce collections.
It would be better for discussion if you would bother to read. It was clearly written that state collection agencies would collect the NRST.
As for enforcement, the FairTax is orders of magnitude more efficient than the Income tax. First, it ***takes two*** people to cheat under the FairTax, a buyer and a seller.
It also makes convictions of cheaters more problematic, because they'll support each others stories. Moreover, without a Federal income tax the States will likely drop their State income taxes and either hike property taxes or add to the sales tax. To replace a 12% income tax in California with a sales tax would push the total sales tax with NRST to somewhere near 50%. Hence, because of the amount of money involved, and because of the difficulty in collecting from private parties, the enforcement scheme will have to be more draconian and invasive than it is now, not just once a year.
You can always move out of California. The last time I checked it was still legal to do so. In fact, California could just go the way of Detroit.
And at that 50% rate, you think NRST will sell? And you think people won't cheat in droves? If massive numbers of people cheat, you think there won't be an intrusive IRS tracking EVERY SINGLE TRANSACTION to get their cut? That's so unrealistic as to be flamingly dishonest.
50%? This is getting absurd.
Second, more than 70% of all retail transactions are carried out by about 3000 corporate chains.
And you think that won't change? You think Federal, State, and local governments won't go after that 50% with a vengeance by forcing individuals to abide by the same reporting standards as "forced" upon corporations? Get real. Loading sole proprietors with the same bureaucratic "reporting" and "compliance" requirements as the big guys can handle easily has been the game in every other form of regulation for nearly a century.
It would be helpful if you had a knowledge of the facts. 50% is not the NRST rate, far from it. Sole proprietors have to collect sales tax now, they just collect more under a different category of tax, and they send it to the same place.
Oh I can surely see how people will be upset. But they will also know that their costs are lowered substantially and their federal income tax is gone, disappeared! But business owners will have a new problem debating with their customers why so much tax has to be collected for the federal government. I think that will bring a wake up call to the public about the whole problem of spending, hmmmm....lots of good coming from this.
No, it is not 'the' problem, it is 'a' problem. And it is a totally separate problem that can only be helped by the FairTax because of the transparency of the FairTax.
Nonsense. With 30% of all transactions in private, the cost of that "transparency" will be a police state like we've never seen. You're in fantasy land.
I disagree that it will be a police state more than what exists now. In fact I believe black markets will shrivel up because it will be so easy to sting them when attempts are made to pass goods and services without applying the required tax.
And there is also the huge benefit of finally collecting in an indirect manner those taxes that escape from underground activities such as drug dealing, prostitution, loan sharking, money laundering, why? Because even drug dealers and prostitutes will purchase retail items for living. But under the Income tax, they pay nothing because they declare nothing. Estimates place the level of tax revenues lost due to the underground economy at more than $300 billion.
I already did above. That's how disinterested in facts you are. I'll be working. Let me know when you've read it.
Really? That is what they said 100 years ago when we transition from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy. They were wrong.
Maybe we should have people dig holes and fill them up again? Is that what you propose?
Agrarian and industrial both required many people to complete the jobs at hand. While technology requires highly educated people, it requires less people overall. How many offices have you been in where groups of employees perform useless or redundant tasks? I’m most certainly not on Obama’s or any union’s side, I’m just stating what I think will happen. If too many are on the dole or unemployed, our economy will stink. People will vote for free shit. Cheap Chinese crap isn’t worth the long term result. “Free trade” isn’t free. The USA’s quality of life will decline. Do you disagree?
HA HAHAHA HA HA!!!
What a laugh!
Look at this:
Laurence M. Vance is a freelance writer and an adjunct instructor in accounting and economics at Pensacola Junior College in Pensacola, FL.
Hahahahaha!!!! You really brought in the big guns!
Ok you made me laugh. You get a half point for that.
Now go away and bother someone else now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.