Posted on 10/19/2006 5:11:50 PM PDT by pigdog
Very wise. I waste too much time trying to explain basics economic realities to the fairtax supporters. You already seem to have a full grasps of the shortcomings. Conceptually it is a good plan, but there is no way you can just switch over from an income tax to a consumption tax and not throw the entire economy into chaos.
Fairtaxers will brand you an IRS-lover for commments like that.
"I waste too much time trying to explain basics economic realities to the fairtax supporters."
LOL!!!
"Fairtaxers will brand you an IRS-lover for commments [sic] like that."
You're much too eager to put words in others' mouths.
In fact Lurking Libertarian is pretty much right on with both counts - the lower the FairTax rate the better and the less government spending the better. Sounds good to me.
I'm saving this post for all posterity. I may sneak it back into these threads from time to time. LOL!!!
The official SQL economic textbook:
Quite so!!
But in the Sears Catalog you can order what you want. Including economics. LOL.
Well all you 'guys' need is little pixie dust to make all your fairy tax fantasies come true.
And if he were an Income Taxer...
Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.
I guess lobbyists are like lawyers - the good ones help us get what we want bad ones help the other guy get what he wants.
Under the FairTax the decision to not pay government is tied to the decision to not make a purchase. If the government doesn't get paid, neither does the business owner, nor the producers of the products and services not purchased.
It is impossible to impact one, without impacting the other. Ultimately, that's all of us.
Fair Taxers are like diapers - they need to be changed often - and often for the same reason.
Response: Because the FairTax scheme relies on a consistent level of consumption, I would think the choice for a healthy economy is not either or.
pigdog asks: Please give us the link(s) to the exact phrase(s) where you think you read this. Or is this something you just dreamed up especially for this post?
What I was referring to is the oft repeated claim that the FairTax is a more reliable source of government revenue than the income tax because in good times or bad, spending (consumption) is more consistent (reliable) than income.
Consumption is a more stable source of revenue than income. A recent study shows that for the years 1959 to 1995, the consumption base was less variable than the income tax base. Why? Because during difficult times due to unemployment or an inability to work, there are less wages to be taxed; however, people continue to consume. They use savings and borrow money to buy what they need.
http://www.fairtax.net/faqs.htm#who
What the FairTaxers miss, is that if one's income is reduced, one's taxes are also reduced under the income tax; while the FairTaxers rely on (or at least use as an argument) consumption remaining constant and thus stable tax collection, even if one must borrow or go through savings to continue supplying the government with revenue. One system has the taxpayer handing over a portion of what he actually has and the other paying taxes on what he needs even if he has to borrow to do so.
Using fear and loathing to sell a red herring is a recipe for disaster -- and economic and societal disaster without parallel.
The only people I have known who paid for someone to post on this forum was the fairtax.org.
Wow, attacking someone's faith. That is as low as it gets.
Sorry I misunderstood you.....glad to hear it! I'm just at the questioning stage still.
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.