Posted on 05/06/2009 11:57:23 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
... and this time it's none other than Dave Ramsey. The FairTax is a bold proposal. It is only natural that people are going to try to criticize it. Is it too much to ask for these people to do at least a modicum of research so that they at least appear to know what they're talking about?
This time the culprit is Dave Ramsey. I like the guy, and I like his approach. His sermons on living debt free are right on, and no doubt he's helped millions of people to improve their financial. OK .. mighty fine. But now he's taken it upon himself to opine that the FairTax simply isn't, in his words, "fair."
Let's take this quote from Ramsey's article: "People would only pay taxes on items they buy, except for food, basic clothing and other kinds of necessities." Most of the FairTax supporters know that this is just flat-out wrong. The explanation is incomplete.
If Ramsey really was informed on the FairTax he would know that you pay taxes only on items that you buy at the retail level, and that food, basic clothing and other kinds of necessities are included. Ramsey would also know about the prebate. He would know that every household in this country --- that is, every legal household --- would get a credit or check from the Treasury Department every single month equal to the FairTax they would be expected to pay on the basic necessities of life during the following month. This FairTax prebate is so essential to the FairTax plan that to ignore it, or to be unaware of it entirely, is worse than careless.
Ramsey also writes of the FairTax "This means it's more of a burden on poor people, because they would pay a higher percentage of their overall income."
Sorry, wrong. The poor, poor pitiful poor would pay virtually nothing - zero percent of their income - to the federal government. [ALERT! Brilliant thought follows!] To pay any taxes at all to the feds the poor would have to spend above the poverty level. If they're doing that ... they're not poor. Pretty easy, isn't it?
I wonder why Dave Ramsey doesn't get it? Is there a chance he just shot from the hip here without doing any real research? The FairTax deserves better than this flippant, uninformed treatment.
Dave Ramsey could be a good proponent of the FairTax. He's very bright, and he would recognize the beauty of this plan if he just would take the time to actually study it. Knowing what you're talking about .... Is that too much to ask?
Weird, this audio clip on YouTube seems to show Ramsey supporting the FairTax. Huh. Maybe he's lost changed his mind since that was recorded.
Are you back to this lie? THis is only true if people only get to keep their current takehome. Most of these taxes are payroll and withheld income taxes.
With the FairTax promise of "Keep 100% of your paycheck" at most prices for domestic goods would drop 7-10% before the addition of the at least 30% FairTax (more likely 40% plus). Prices out the door would skyrocket.
And the number of people buying things on the black market or for business use would also skyrocket requiring an NRST enforcement team with real teeth. Every bit as bad as the IRS. And the higher the tax, the bigger the evasion, requiring an even higher tax.
But we've been over all this before ad infinitum...
Most of the same questions that apply to implementing sales tax would apply here. Yes, there are some questions that need to be answered but when I read the remarks by Dave Ramsey I thought he sounded open to the Fair Tax. I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bath water and anything that gets rid of the IRS can't be all bad. My favorite part of the Fair Tax is the anonymity and the true fairness of the tax.
“I can see all kinds of problems right off the bat with defining what foods are taxed and what aren’t, what constitutes ‘basic clothing’, and what is a necessity and what isn’t. Would caviar be taxed? Sirloin steak? Lobster? How many shirts, socks, trousers, sets of underwear, etc. am I allowed under ‘basic clothing’? How will I know when I exceed the limits? Is highspeed interned a necessity? How about air conditioning? Is TV a necessity, and if so would my 42” Plasma TV be tax free? I like to read, how about books? Are my books taxed or just some of them? Is a car a necessity? If so, will a high end BMW be tax free? There are almost too many questions that would need answering before someone can take the Fairtax seriously.”
This is a terrific rebuttal to those who criticize the FairTax because of the rebate provision and argue that exempting necessities would be simpler.
The benefit is that all of the drug dealers(there are lots) and other criminal enterprises would suddenly be paying the tax. They wouldn't care really because they could just steal more or raise the price on their drugs. So a neutral loss on tax evasion (the same people will continue to do it) and the increase in black market profits toward the tax base might actually lead to a net gain.
The best scenario is to stop taxing corporate profits. Corporations pay out big pay and bonuses so they don't get nailed with tax. Take that tax away, and corporations would hold more money and invest it into growing the business.
I own several companies, one being a manufacturer. The government is trying to put me out of business, and drive my employees out of private healthcare. That is not right and should not be tolerated.
The Fair Tax isn't the big fix but should be part of the grand plan. Each state needs to claim sovereignty and take responsibility of their own citizens rather than the Federal Government running everything. Go back to limited Federal government with a Fair Tax only for their limited expenses. Social programs should be at the state level only.
And I'm not opposed in principle to it either. But the article brings up a lot of questions I think need to be answered before it can be considered a serious proposal.
“If someone is diagnosed with cancer and also has a zit treating the zit while ignoring the cancer is a fairly stupid course, wouldn’t you say?
And yet Fair Taxers want to address the blemish first.”
I listed the adverse economic trends in an earlier post which we would like to see addressed with the FairTax - and for which no FT opponent that I am aware of has an alternative approach to. Those included the largest trade deficit in human history and the steady erosion of our manufacturing base.
As Dr Oded Shenkar, Professor of International Business at Ohio State University has said, there is no precedent in history for any economy maintaining its viability without a robust manufacturing sector.
The Trustees of Medicare warn that we are less than 10 years away from the day in which that program will not have the revenues to pay for the benefits promised.
These are just two examples of the types of challenges which this country faces which you compare to a case of zits.
I will let the other readers of this thread decide for themselves if the economic trends that I and other FairTax supporters are concerned about are serious or not.
“While I have been a Fair Tax supporter for years, there are problems with it. Tax evasion would be very high. Its no different than now thought. People still barter things tax free. Happens all the time. Technically if you give a person $10 to wash your car there needs to be tax paid, even if its the kid across the street. Its crazy.”
Most retail sales take place at the level of the “big-box” retailers. The Wal-Marts, the Kroger’s, Home Depot, Target, etc. account for a very large proportion of total retail sales. That would include car dealers for all purchases of new cars. If those retailers account for about 80% of retail sales, then we could have 100% non-compliance among the smaller “Mom & Pops” (which we won’t) and still have tax compliance as good or better than we do with the current system.
Right, and IMHO the Fair Tax proposal qualifies to fill your prescription.
If the critics would be honest about the real cause of their negative opinion being the result of misinformation or incorrect assumptions their bias against it would soften and they would then admit that it's actually a fair and well thought out proposal, and is infinitely preferable to the outrageously intrusive, unfair, cobbled together monstrosity that we're saddled with now.
A system that requires as much time, effort, and expense in order to determine how much tax is owed as the current system requires is more maddening to me and many other Fair Tax advocates than having the money extracted from our pockets. No tax is desirable and no tax collection system is perfect, but I suppose I will never understand why anyone intimately familiar with the current grossly Un-fair Tax would prefer it over the Fair Tax.
Its really quite simple...the FairTax sorts the freedom lovers from the pseudofreedom lovers....the RINOS from the Conservatives....the Constitutionalists from the socialists...in short..those who do from those who take.
As a critic, I think if the proponents would be honest about the real cause of their positive opinion being the result of misinformation or incorrect assumptions then their support would go the way of the do-do bird...
I'm sure it makes you feel all tingly to say that but it is complete crap. I am no socialist, nor am I a RINO, and I am a freedom lover. But I also own two businesses (neither tax related) and I have taken the time to understand how this FairTax plan will not work as advertised. Not even close.
And that was before the idiot American population elected liberals to take over the Executive and Legislative branches (they already have the Judicial) and you FairTaxers think that you are going to get a major "freedom-loving" tax reform effort through them (which it isn't but assume it was a plan to reward the productive- do you really think it would pass?).
Delusional.
Who is getting more than they pay Filo? Who? Give us some credible examples Filo.
Who is spending so little that they pay less FairTax NRST than they collect in a monthly rebate? Who?
A 23% FairTax NRST rate results in a monthly rebate check of about $196 for an individual adult Filo. That means $196 is 23% of an assumed level of spending at the poverty line. Do the arithmetic Filo and tell us how a person can exist by spending so little as to profit from a rebate check, and then tell us HOW MUCH you believe THEY CAN PROFIT PER MONTH by spending less and collecting a $196 rebate. Give some estimates Filo. You do have back-up for your hallucinating spew don’t you?
Should be easy for you because after all you’ve been on these FairTax threads telling everyone how smart you are. Shouldn’t take you but a few minutes to do the math.
Waiting....tick tick tick....
My oh my...you have no evidence that I ever said any untruth about the FairTax except what you hallucinated.
But here is evidence once again that you’re a scam RobFromLooneyVille. Let readers see for themselves.
************************************************************
Here it is for all to see:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1887973/posts?page=400#400
And here is my response:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1887973/posts?page=429#429
And just to be clear, your FT basher idiot author made the claim in the first link above:
“Finally, I hit paydirt. It turns out that a married couple with two children who rented their home and made $40,000 would, under the Fair Tax, pay $860 a year more in taxes than they do today.”
And when I checked, it was absolutely false. And I pointed it out to you in the second link above. I had gone ahead and verified the calculation and found this basher of yours had lied, hallucinated, committed gross error or all three.
But the point was you did not apologize. Instead you are just as cocky and errant as you have been as a FT heckler and basher for so long.
And for those that haven’t been driven away by scum bashers of the FairTax on this thread, you can do the calculation for yourself here:
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=calculator
The results for RobFromGA’s idiot author example of a married couple, two children, employed and filing jointly earning gross of $40,000, no deductions, no purchasing of used items (makes the FairTax result worse), paying $1,510 in federal income tax, assuming an average 20% reduction of pre-tax price in retail products and services, the results are:
With the Fair Tax, you get:
25.62% MORE spendable income.
$7,045.95 MORE purchasing power.
$7,304.68 LESS federal taxes.
And yet RobFromGa’s idiot author claims to have hit ‘paydirt’. And yet still RobFromGa never apologized, never admitted to failing to check the author’s veracity. never nothing.
In other words, RobFromTheLocalNutHouse is a useful idiot to other idiots.
************************************************************
You seem to have missed the part of you training where “Perfect is the enemy of good enough.”
You’re not going get perfect.
The FT is tied irrevocably into the repeal of the 16th Amendment.
“Unconstitutional” is no longer an objection. CFR is unconstitutional on its face, and its the law of the land. There is no provision in the Constitution for transfer payments like welfare, WIC, and farm supports, but there they are. Social Security is hideously unConstituional.
Spending is not part of this discussion. Thats for different thread. This is about revenue.
Looneyville huh... that’s pretty creative.
Your belief that a family of 4 earning $40,000 per year can have $7,000 more purchasing power under the FairTax is what is a hallucination.
As I said before the chances of prices going down 20% would only happen if your wage earners didn’t get to keep their whole paycheck but only what they get now in takehome.
And the rate of 30% is not correct either they have left out the fact that government has to pay the FairTax on all its purchases from defense spending to Medicare spending to government salaries...
Here’s some breaking news on one of those “zits” as you call them:
“WASHINGTON – Social Security and Medicare are fading even faster under the weight of the recession, heading for insolvency years sooner than previously expected, the government warned Tuesday.
Social Security will start paying out more in benefits than it collects in taxes in 2016, a year sooner than projected last year, and the giant trust fund will be depleted by 2037, four years sooner, trustees reported.
Medicare is in even worse shape.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_on_bi_ge/us_social_security
“If the FT is revenue neutral, as advertised, then it’s not going to magically create additional funds to fix those problems.”
You are correct; there is nothing “magical” about the way that the FairTax addresses these problems. As I explained above, the overall economy will grow faster than the payroll tax base and therefore provide a broader base from which to pull those revenues. There is certainly nothing magical about that.
Also, there is nothing magical about the difference between static and dynamic scoring. Please take some time to educate yourself on that issue.
You certainly have a right to not acknowledge the difference between static and dynamic scoring or the difference between the payroll base and the broader overall economy.
That does not mean, however, that those differences don’t exist. Please see my tagline.
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.