[pigdog]

You haven't answered my question which was triggered by your own foolish comment - do you really appear in "Jackass Number Two"???

From another place in the paper:

"In practice, therefore, it would probably be possible to implement the FairTax at the 23% rate without any reduction in federal spending."

I realize that you sometimes do your own reading so I'll stop posting all the stuff from the paper that shows what I said it did and let you do your own reading. This paper is a static analysis and when the dynamic analysis shows up (which I don't doubt it will) it's bound to show that the most likely rate will be less than 23%.

[Your Nightmare]

From another place in the paper: "In practice, therefore, it would probably be possible to implement the FairTax at the 23% rate without any reduction in federal spending."

You said the paper "clearly indicate[d] that 23% is right on the money." Now you post a quote that states "it would probably be possible to implement the FairTax at the 23% rate" as evidence?

[Either way, all this talk of a rate below 20% is obviously total bunk.]