Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: pigdog
"The money in your bogus lawyer example was money paid by the illegal guy to the lawyer for his services and it was the lawyer paying the tax due to his services, not the illegal guy."

So if I go to the store today, buy an item for $100, the store adds $6 sales tax, and I pay them $106., I'm not actually paying that tax? You're saying the store is paying that tax when they forward my $6 to the state?

Do you realize how absolutely ridiculous you sound when you make these arguments of yours? Do you actually expect to be taken seriously on this forum with comments like that?

"you doubled the amount the lawyer paid as well since he paid only $14,000 in income tax (as opposed to fica which HE benefits from, not the illegal guy)."

The lawyer benefits from the fica. Fine. I don't disagree. But who really paid into fica in my example? The same person who paid his income taxes. The drug dealer. The lawyer was only a conduit.

Let's say we did away with taxes altogether. Let's say the federal government was financed by export tariffs.

How much would our lawyer charge the illegal guy to end up with the same amount of disposable income? About 30% less is the answer. Meaning that the federal government is collecting that hidden tax today. I rest my case.

1,135 posted on 09/12/2006 9:09:38 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1133 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen
... and your case rest very uneasily inceed since the sales tax of 6% you cite is YOUR tax and the business merele collects and forwards it to the state (though at present they are not paid to do so but must bvear that cost themselves ... an unfunded mandate). Under the FairTax, there ARE no nufunded mandates and the merchant collecting and forwarding the tax is paid to do so.

Your attempt at derision fails also since he lawyer in your bogus example is paying his own taxes and not just forwarding the illegal guy's taxes to the government as in your sales tax example. And your "no tax" example is meaningless, too, since the most likely result would be for the lawyer's fee to DROP with the removal of taxes - just as will happen with the embedded taxes we've been talking about to help reduce prices under the FairTax - and increase the taxpayer's purchasing power,

Now answer the question I just posed to you in #1136!!!

1,138 posted on 09/12/2006 9:36:35 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1135 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson