Then it is a complete crock. Because of course there will be an increased burden on state/local governments when they have to add a 30% tax to all their non-educ purchases, salaries and benefits.
"... there will be an increased burden on state/local governments when they have to add a 30% tax to all their non-educ purchases, salaries and benefits ..."
It's hard to understand whether you intentionally continue to make such pronouncements of absolute nonsense in ignorance of the facts or whether its something else, but the fact is that the gross wages you mention are taxed at 23% rather than "30%" (which does not exist under the FairTax) and I have pointed this out to you many, many times over past threads, asking you to admit your error. Instead you have continued to insist on the "30%" number which is quite incorrect.
Let me say it again, the gross wages of non-educational governmental employees (federal, state, and local) are taxed at 23% of those wages, amounting, in effect, to a 23% excise on those wages.
This is clearly shown in the derivations in the paper where such wages are taxed at the 23% rate and those costs are included in and covered by the revenue neutral 235 tax rate.
The import of this is that if, say, a government body had $100,000 in such wages it would need to pay $23,000 in tax on those wages.
Perhaps you'd like to admit the error you've been insisting on for hundreds of post and perhaps not. If so, just admit you were wrong and I was right about the 23% rate, but if not then disprove the validity of the derivations in the paper.
We all look forward o your answer I'm sure.