Posted on 09/03/2006 5:18:40 AM PDT by Man50D
Abolish the federal income tax!
No more taxes on savings and investments!
A "Fair Tax" can completely fund the federal government, Social Security and Medicare!
You control how much you spend!
So what are we waiting for?
You, the taxpayers of America burdened with an income tax that is costly, wasteful and sinking America into inevitable bankruptcy. All current forms of federal taxation would end! You would keep 100 percent of your paycheck. You control how you spend your paycheck. It's your money. You make the decisions as to how you want to spend your money.
The Fair Tax would create more jobs and give the USA a level playing field when selling overseas. United States Senator John Linder (R-Georgia) is sponsoring the "Fair Tax Act of 2005." If enacted by Congress, it would accomplish all of the above. Simple. Easy. And affordable.
It's the best way to downsize government without disrupting the economy.
To join the "Fair Tax" movement in America, just sign the "Economic Freedom & Fairness" Petition supporting forward-thinking solutions. Go to www.grassfire.net and liberate the working class of taxpayers. Grassfire is trying to give the working class the same kind of freedom America's founders gave to those who joined the American Revolution in 1776 with the "Declaration of Independence." We won the Revolutionary War, but have lost our country since the 16th Amendment (income tax) became "Law" in 1913.
(Excerpt) Read more at bayshorenews.com ...
If that assumption were true, we could all get rich just by moving money from one pocket to another.
The Tax Panel evaluated some hypothetical retail sales tax that doesn't exist - that part is right.
Claiming that it shouldn't tax government, though, is quite incorrect since the income tax does so and all of the so-called flat tax plans do so as well. There is absolutely no rationale for NOT having the government tax itself since they do now. Not doing so would merely help the expansion of government - which is exactly the opposite of what anyone should want. The issue is not whether the taxing of government provides revenue or not, but whether it keeps the government from enlarging itself with a tax advantage compared to private businesses.
Mr. Boortz hisself.
"The extensive research behind HR 25, The FairTax Bill, shows that the average embedded taxes in every consumer product or service is about 22%. In some industries, such as leather goods, the embedded tax is smaller. In other industries, such as homebuilding and construction, the embedded tax is higher, but it averages out to somewhere between 22 and 23%. With the passage of The FairTax Bill, those embedded taxes disappear. These embedded taxes include the combined tax burdens of all entities involved in bringing those goods or services to market, and that includes you, the employee, and the taxes you incur as a result of your employment."
"since for a year or more now there has been no such number used"?
What? And if I wait another year, what will the number be?
No, they don't figure twice the current evasion rate, and they do explain the logic used to assume evasion. You would know that if you read the report and not just the FairTax rebuttal.
Or CRAPP for short.
You claim the government taxes itself now, and yet, who could deny that government grows even as we post. That's a meaningless argument if ever I read one!
"... there are no real numbers to use ..."
Oh, but there are. The CBO figures for the comprehensive household income tax rates and amounts and they cover some 120 plus million taxpayers. In addition the FairTax prebate figures are also real and readily available. The price reduction of 9% was stipulated to by the naysayers (though many FairTax supporters think it will be a greater reduction, the examples use the 9% figure).
The rest of the work is simple arithmetic that anyone with some facility with numbers (not you, of course, since you've shown none) could do. The examples merely use the same income under the FairTax as under the income tax and the comparisons are very valid - even if you don't care for them because they show your income tax in a bad light.
LOL!
The FairTax studies, OTOH, are generally very careful to cite assumptions and sources and so are better done by far since they are meant for public debate (the Panel report is not - it's an inside the Beltway con job directed at politicos). You'll find many of he pols who wish to oppose the FairTax will cite this report (regardless of its serious flaws) to their constituents as justification for not supporting the FairTax. That's a false justification if ever there were one.
No, that's not at all what was said. Don't try the strawman taxtic of putting words in my mouth.
No they don't. Show me where. The fairtax will be 'generating' some 15% of revenues by the government taxing government. There is nothing like that under the current system. A completely fradulant proposal, which is why the tax panel correctly altered the fairtax in their analysis.
Me too. But pigdog has zero sense of how business works. He just thinks all businesses are guaranteed some set profit margin.
LOL, really. That is why it took the AFFT some 10 years to find out that their Jorgenson studies assumed that workers take home pay will stay constant. AFFT lied about that for a long long long time. The fairtax organization with their paid for whores, I mean 'economists', are very shady with their studies.
And keep in mind that Boortz is attributing this to research behind the FairTax ... most likely one of Jorgenson's studies. Other economists have shown other interpretations.
Regardless - the 9% figure I gave is the figure that even the naysayers have stipulated to here and that's the price reduction used in our comparative purchasing power studies. If you wait another year it isn't likely to drop below 9% on these threads but might increase to, say, 12-15%, As for The FairTax Book - who knows???
Well, price reduction, that's different. In your case, you're taking out 22% in embedded taxes, using 9% to reduce prices, and passing on the rest to the employee. Fine.
Others may choose to use all 22% to reduce prices. But that doesn't change the fact that there's 22% embedded in there to begin with, which was the only point I was making when I said that, today, the drug dealer is paying 22% on everything he buys.
Yep, if the 22% figure is correct, 60% of that comes out of the employee's paycheck in the form of withholding and FICA taxes.
Funny how piggiepooch can't seem to figure out that simple idea after all these years.
Anyone with a functioning BS detector would know that your claim that the average American was going to cut his overall Federal tax bill by more than 50% is ridiculous, and that any "study" that shows this is using bad assumptions or is being grossly misrepresented. That can be said without even looking at the calculation. The result is economically impossible.Not only that but if anyone with even the slightest bit of savvy (which the poster suggesting such has none) knows that any proposal of that idiocy has less than no chance of ever being looked at...that is after being laughed out of the halls of Congress.
I sense desperation.
Claiming that the government should not "tax itself" is both dishonest and incorrect since the income tax does not and all of the various flat tax proposals do not untax themselves either. You are merely ignorant of the facts, apparently.
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.