Posted on 10/10/2006 8:59:26 AM PDT by cryptical
We've all been hornswoggled, then, eh??? Should we just stop paying into S/S??? Inquiring minds want to know.
Is that a "personal attack", perhaps???No it's not. Maybe if you figured out what a personal attack was, you wouldn't keep getting banned.
"I also favor entitlement reform and provatization [sic] as one of our must urgent tasks, and hope that we are able to make some progress in this area in the next Congress. "
No doubt you do - as do many other taxpayers - however it hasn't happened in the last couple of generations nor in fact for almost 100 years now (with respect to the income tax itself), so "hoping" as you do that the situation will magically correct itself within Congress is something like "... if wishes were horses then beggars would ride ...".
In fact, the only real likelihood of meaningful change in the tax laws or S/S & M/C that I see is to separate them from an income tax that can be (and is) incrementally manipulated at the whim of Congress to a tax form such as the FairTax where raising tax rates raises them on ALL taxpayers - something most congressmen would think long and hard about since Job 1 is getting elected again.
Such a change in S/S & M/C funding will be the most rapid possible demonstration to an individual taxpayer what the real cost of these entitlements is to him each and every time he buys a taxable thing ... and no, it's not the cost of the thing involved "plus 30%" as is so often seen in the demagoguery on these threads, but the cost of the thing plus the effective FairTax rate (normally much less than the 23% ti marginal rate).
"No it's not."
REALLY???
Really??? The ensuring of legally-required funding of S/S is not part of the S/S laws???Not by bureaucrats "determining" tax rates as the Fairtax law allows them to do without oversite or congressional approval.
Presently SS bureaucrats don't determine laws or tax rates, that would only come with the Fairtax.
Politically, if there is only one tax rate that everyone needs to think about and keep track of, there will be lots of interest in that one rate as well as opposition to raising it. One key objection to the FairTax is that it is too visible, meaning that it exposes the true costs of the government. This is at the same time its major strength and weakness. Exposing the true cost of the government ensures downward pressure on the size of government. But doing so makes politicians who like to hide taxes wary.
First, the true cost of government is hidden in the debt, not tax rates.
Second, Don't read further, don't think, just focus on the "one tax rate" that we need to concern ourselves with.
“Problem” #14 – “The FairTax doesn’t repeal federal excise taxes.”
True. But not a problem. We want to retain some flexibility to tax goods, like cigarettes, the consumption of which can impose significant costs on society at-large, at higher rates. These taxes serve a different purpose than general revenues. They are in effect taxes on externalities.
Don't worry, not a problem.
REALLY???yeah, really.
"Presently SS bureaucrats don't determine laws or tax rates, that would only come with the Fairtax. "No, not at all - but you're welcome to misbelieve anything you choose. Many posters have pointed out to you the flaw in your thinking ... but you're welcome to continue.
This is the first time its been suggested that the SS and Medicare portion of the FairTax will be called out on the sales receipt.
But who cares, the aggregate cost of the prebate is larger.
I'm sorry to see that you don't understand what the term "in practice" means.Well when you've finished with your usual attempts at ridicule you can define what it means in context of the quote you posted...Or maybe that would be too revealing.
Maybe "in practice" means things that "could" be done in your dream world like spending freezes and spending cuts to accommodate your 23% rate rather than practical applications.
It's more than just a little telling that you have to call for hypothetical dream world applications to accomodate your 23% revenue neutral rate since this is the first time I recall you or any other Fairtaxer, including AFFT, ever calling for spending freezes or cuts (Oh wait, don't tell me. Spending cuts have been called for by many Fairtax supporters on many of these threads..or words to that effect). Now you only want cuts and freezes to protect your lies about an arbitrary rate.
"First, the true cost of government is hidden in the debt, not tax rates. "Actually, it's hidden both places but the part that taxpayers can influence with the passage of the FairTax is the tax rate. Once the FairTax becomes law it will be more likely that the spending (debt) can be more readily influenced by taxpayers (voters) since it will no longer be possible to hide any part of the government cost in the tax rate without affecting all taxpayers and since most debt must be serviced by the tax revenue that will also become move visible and subject to taxpayer influence.
"Second, Don't read further, don't think, just focus on the "one tax rate" that we need to concern ourselves with."
Good thinking since excise taxes are a relatively small part of the total tax burden - and it is the greater tax burden that the FairTax addresses.
Oh, I see ... it's because you do it and say it's not??? A definitional thing???
"This is the first time its been suggested that the SS and Medicare portion of the FairTax will be called out on the sales receipt.But who cares, the aggregate cost of the prebate is larger. "
No such thing has been "suggested" by me or anyone I know so it's hard to know where you got that idea? If you think it's a good one, why not write to Congressman Linder insisting that he change the bill to incorporate that?
The aggregate amount of the prebate is actually incorporated within the 23% revenue neutral rate and is in fact less that S/S plus M/C, but you're welcome to present both your sources that definitively show that the prebate is a larger amount.
This actually contains most of the teeth the IRS has. It shows the FairTax is business as usual as far as tax collection goes. The FairTax does not do anything about eliminating the 800 lb. gorilla outside of renaming it.
"... I'm sorry to see that you don't understand what the term "in practice" means.Well when you've finished with your usual attempts at ridicule you can define what it means in context of the quote you posted...Or maybe that would be too revealing ..."
No "attempts at ridicule" involved. I'm very sad to see (as I said) that you don't know what "in practice" means as it is really quite clear in situ and needn't be clarified further. I think most people would understand what it meant but you don't seem to, that's all.
As are most FairTax supporters, I'm certainly in favor of reduced government spending on any level and think all governments spend far more than necessary since they have not been restrained enough by taxpayers. That may very well be because many taxpayers perceive that others, not they, pay the taxes. With the FairTax, that will change greatly and a tax rate change (up or down) will affect each taxpayer.
" Now you only want cuts and freezes to protect your lies about an arbitrary rate."
There are no "lies" involved and no "arbitrary rates" since the FairTax is a carefully-derived revenue neutral rate as shown by the paper - which also shows that the resulting rate when the bill is acted upon by Congress - will most likely be less than 23%.
You might as well make the arguement that there is no indication that bears crap in the woods. Kotlikoff is a paid for shill for the fairtax. Trying to pretend Kotlikoff is some neutral third party is just the typical honesty pigdog brings to the debate.
"... just the typical honesty pigdog brings to the debate ..."
Easy with the personal attacks.
I don't see that your analogy makes much sense however. There are actually five people cited as authors of the report in question. Do you find them all to be "paid for shills" - especially so since AFFT is not mentioned in the paper?
Are you going to deny that Kotlikoff has not been paid by AFFT for his work promoting the fairtax?
Whether paid or not, do you have some definitive disagreement with the arithmetic studies and conclusions done in the paper (whether by Kotlikoff or others - which origin I also don't know but perhaps you do).
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.