In #472 contradicts your own #464 since you state (in #464) that the entitlement proportions will not decrease - as I just pointed out above. This means, indeed, that you ARE saying (as is Looey) that the FairTax can only go upward automatically. It also means that your claim of "not debating" the direction of change is wrong. You certainly did in #464. Or maybe it was just a lie like you continuously still accuse me of???
In #474 you shoot yourself in the foot again since I've said nothing about the rate "automatically fluctuating" at all. In fact, what I've said is quite the opposite. I've said there will be no automatic annual increase by your "unelected bureaucrats" and that with the undoubted change in the entitlement proportions going down, that there will be no "automatic" decrease either since either the FairTax rate or the GRR would have to be changed - and that would be a Congressional action. I believe that abandoning that responsibility to the "unelected bureaucrats" as the two of you claim would probably be unconstitutional or at least a power and responsibility that Congress would not be willing to hand over to two subordinate agencies.
Entitlement proportions? What crap are you talking about now. I have never used that phrase and have no idea what it would even mean. The simple fact is you are a big fact liar and when confronted just makes up more lies and changes the subject to try to cover it up.