Dear Mind-numbed Robot,
Oh, I got a bunch of them.
To me, the 16th amendment dealie, though, is a killer.
To see an example of an amendment to the Constitution where there is delayed enforcement, look at my post #65. Honestly, this just isn't difficult to remedy.
Even under the most ideal NRST legislation, I'd work rabidly against any politician who voted in the NRST before we got rid of the 16th amendment.
Other than that, I have a whole host of issues with the proposed NRST.
Most of them, however, intersect a deeper problem, which is that the government wants to collect to damned much money with the NRST.
If they were going to collect 8% of GDP or maybe even 10%, a lot of my objections (not all) would go away. A 12% (exclusive rate) sales tax would work. Maybe even a 15% sales tax.
30% ain't gonna work too good for a whole lot of reasons.
But you gotta fix the 16th amendment problem first.
Unlike some, I just don't trust those congresscritters.
I work in DC. I've seen these folks up close and personal.
sitetest
Then you have seen how they manipulate the present system. Your working against changing it is confusing, to me.
To me, the 16th amendment dealie, though, is a killer.
Even under the most ideal NRST legislation, I'd work rabidly against any politician who voted in the NRST before we got rid of the 16th amendment.
But you gotta fix the 16th amendment problem first.
Unlike some, I just don't trust those congresscritters.
I think that all of us who favor the NRST don't trust those Congresscritters either. We see in the present system how they do their self dealing to the detriment of us all. Since you seem to share our opinion, I am at a lost as to why you don't want to neuter them.
There are technical reasons why it is best not to try to amend the Constitution first, in addition to the time factor I mentioned. Those have been pointed out and explained by others. However, what the Fair Tax does is disarm it in the meantime.
Just as the Phoenix arose from the ashes, politicians can do anything, as you have witnessed. There is no antidote to crooked politicians in a free society. The Fair Tax nor anything else can make them honest. However, we can take them back to square one and make them start over while being wary of them and their techniques from past experience.
Also keep in mind, there are those who support the present system. Some are misguided, some think they are profiting from it, while many are simply anti-American and anti-free enterprise. Please be aware I am not labeling you as either one.
Most of them, however, intersect a deeper problem, which is that the government wants to collect to damned much money with the NRST.
If they were going to collect 8% of GDP or maybe even 10%, a lot of my objections (not all) would go away. A 12% (exclusive rate) sales tax would work. Maybe even a 15% sales tax.
After all this discussion, I would assume that you know that the Fair Tax does not tax the entire GDP. That is one of its unique features and one reason it is called Fair. To repeat for the at least zillioneth time, it taxes only things not previously taxed. That is to eliminate double taxation as we often see in the present system. Those not previously taxed items are new items sold at retail, and services, which by their nature are always new. That is only a portion of the GDP and it is the reason that the NRST has to be a higher rate than you prefer in order to bring in the same amount of tax revenue as the present system. Were the entire GDP taxed the rates could be as you desire but that would be a whole new and more complicated animal.
As I have said before, the advantages of the NRST seem so obvious to me it is hard to imagine opposition. I think that even if we granted all your objections, you meaning all those who oppose the NRST, that it would still be a good deal.