[groanup]

The tax consequences of government policy are of great concern to me, as it affects my ultimate real return greatly.

As it is to us all. I'm not going to respond to all matters in your post as it would take too long.

My absolute theory is that with a consumption tax the economy will grow boundless. There are certain scenarios where seniors would be hurt. Let's have the debate. For every senior hurt a whole bunch of seniors prosper because their never taxed plans become tax free. Let's have the debate and equalize. No FairTaxer wants anyone to be hurt outright. We need to adjust.

[GregoryFul]

My take is that taxes should be assessed on income and property. After all, significantly property is what is being protected by government. Say 5% on income and 10% on property, as a start. Mr Bill Gates, 5 billion. Mr Joe average, 2 thousand. Yeh, like that will happen. But of course, when Mr Gates calls the cops on a serious complaint, we'll see $1 million of response, FBI, CIA, state and local cops, but for Mr Joe average - nothing but a $10 report form filled out.

My absolute theory is that with a consumption tax the economy will grow boundless.

I would not subscribe to such a theory. There are lots of uncertainties to growth. Time, resources, talent, courage, confidence, etc. The economy is made up from many unpredictable things - look at Ireland, and its uncanny "artist" contributions to growth. Of course that could be inspired by previous "no-tax" policies on artistic creations. Perhaps? By some odd chance - in some alternate universe? Yea, some moron would need more evidence. It is obvious that if one does not tax productivity, it flourishes. And when one does, it vanishes.

I believe low taxes on productivity, and moderate taxes on passive wealth would be the ticket.