IRS mistakenly penalizes Christine O’Donnell a second time, placed levy on bank accounts

Washington Times ^ | 12/25/14 | John Solomon

[Taxman]

My point is that those of us who believe in the FairTax will keep working to get it passed into law.

Certainly, there will be obstacles; that is what the legislative process is designed to accommodate. What we need to do is allow the process to play out.

Like you, I have very little faith in our government. I’d suggest that you direct your ire at your Congressman and Senators; that is what I do.

[Smokin' Joe]

Oh, I do direct my ire at congressman (we only have one) and Senators.

But they aren't here, promoting a flawed tax plan as if it is a panacea. It isn't personal, I just think the problems with the plan should be sorted out before pushing it as a cure-all. Otherwise, you will end up with something that will be as destructive as what we have, in some cases more so, and I don't think that is your goal--plus the Government on the hook to hand out even more checks.

Even if those might majically appear in people's bank accounts and mailboxes, you still have to monitor for everything from births/deaths to marriages/divorces, relocation, etc. In other words, the Government would have to monitor the location (and personal lives including at least some bank account info) of everyone in the country just to prevent fraud and distribute prebates.

Bad enough with Welfare and Social Security, but this would mean everyone, and on a month-to-month basis.

That simply can't shrink bureaucracy--it would require more, not less.

Whatever new name you give it, the IRS would still exist, and grow.

So I think that while it may sound good at first, on closer examination, the scheme does not sound so good.

Those who require more, simply to live, than the average--be it health care, energy, replacing catastrophic losses, whatever--will be taxed harder than average person.

The other aspect is that whoever saved money, put aside a nest egg for retirement that was taxed based on income, will get smacked again, this time when they spend that saved money, at a rate designed to replace the income tax.

Sorry, but in order for the system to really be "Fair", there will have to be some exceptions, but there aren't any.

SO some will get taxed on savings (on the income they had, on the outgo they spend), some will get hit hard by taxes on medical care when they are already facing a life and death battle against cancer or some other malady, and yet others will get kicked when they are down as they sift through the ashes or rubble of a destroyed home and try to rebuild their lives.

I'm no bleeding heart, but none of that sounds "Fair" to me.

I know life isn't 'fair', but that doesn't mean I will support a tax system which inherently exacerbates those hardships.

So I will oppose the system as proposed, and this is a fine place to do that.

Have a nice day.