Posted on 06/07/2006 3:47:07 PM PDT by pigdog
FairTax Strikes Back - Introduction On April 8, 2003 I wrote my first article on the FairTax proposal. The article FairTax - Income Taxes vs. Sales Taxes detailed the costs and benefits of moving from a system of income taxes to a system of sales taxes. In the article I concluded that "[the]FairTax is an interesting proposal which is unlikely to ever be implemented." The response I received to this article was overwhelming. I've gotten hundreds and hundreds of e-mails on the article, every last one of them from a FairTax supporter. While many of the supporters had something negative to say about the article (and its author), one FairTax supporter wrote a number of intelligent, passionate e-mails about the benefits of the FairTax system, and pointed me towards studies supporting the FairTax.
That supporter is Al Ose, author of the book "America's Best-Kept Secret: FairTax." I was quite impressed with Al's e-mails, so I invited him to write a pro-FairTax article for Economics at About.com. This is that article.
"... It isn't like he's calling you "dumbass" ...""
Actually that was one of the REALLY GOOD ones I considered and then rejected so I wouldn't hurt his feelings.
You see what all of those other nasty, horrid appellations did to him surely?
As it is I'm sure he must have bruises all over his body to show the Mods as evidence (ghastly thought, though).
Your must really be angry and I'm sorry about that if I am the cause. Did you pound your keyboard with your fist twice?No. Not at all angry.
Well, one of the main points of her newest book is that liberals don't debate, they appeal to a higher authority, much like you did, in order to make their case. As in "it's for the children" so that they won't have to make a point, just appeal to innate instincts.I've made my cases on these threads for years and have backed them up with real information, research, and data. Pigdog, on the other hand, never tries to make a point. He only tries to belittle his opponents.
His constant name calling since 1998 has all of a sudden got you stirred up? The day after he was banned? It had nothing to do with kicking a man when he's down?I think it's obvious that the Admins have reached a point where they aren't going to tolerate his antics. I just wanted to know if they were going to tolerate his repeated derogation of people who don't agree with him.
I don't know that I have exactly been called names on these threads, certainly nothing as bad as "nightie". I have been told to screw my self, been constantly called a liar, been villified as a cultist, been told I drink fair tax "kool aid", been told I am ignorant, stupid, dishonest, uninformed most of the time without any further reasoning or explanation.Maybe you should borrow pigdog's hankie.
Not saying it is. Just saying my skin is a lot thicker than worrying about cute variations of my screen name.Good for you. I think pigdog's name-calling continually brings these threads down into the mud and that they would be much more productive if he would stop. I was just curious if the Admins agreed with me.
You can accuse PD of fierce debate but you can't accuse him of lack of ideas or putting his money where his mouth is.Yes I can and I do.
He wades in with you guys a lot better than I do.But he doesn't bring ideas with him.
So since my personal records are subject to search and seizure by the IRS it would seem that my rights are violated wouldn't it?Take it to court.
And here I thought SOS was for Same ole Shi-ite...
bookmark
I'm not looking for "Speaking truth" from you, but rather a debate....
(Debater; to debate:
1. To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
3. To engage in a formal discussion or argument. See Synonyms at discuss.)
Send me the link of where you/your gang have posted your tax reform plan/points. Without valid points/discussion it is hard to take your rhetoric seriously.
You are projecting and in doing so you are engaging in behavior that you claim to dislike.
Methinks that ye protest too much in the name of the IRS.
"B) stop beginning your debate premise with "So you think it's OK for the IRS to kill babies and rape women....""
Gee, I must have missed that on this thread.
Could you show us which post it was .. or did you just think that up all by yourself as an ultra-clever great punch line???
I am. The court of public opinion.
Certainly seems as though the amendment is violated everytim the Feds REQUIRE a third party to divulge: Wages/salaries, interest earned or paid, brokerage transactions, etc.
Here's a link to an annotated version of the 4th Amendment: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment04/
I skimmed it quickly. Didn't find anything with respect to taxing authorities, but I am certain the Founders never envisioned a system whereby the Feds would be possessed of this information.
Goodness gracious, I heard some soft sobbing (I thought) on the early part of the thread and felt that I should check back with you.
Have the Mods advised you as to how to live a clean and upright life and rid yourself of obnoxious opponents? Please let us know what they said. That's certainly a clever way to "win" the debate.
Perhaps they just repeated the old Harry Truman refrain that applies (about the kitchen)?
He's just trying to lighten up the thread.
Nice to see that the anti-reformers are still resorting to name-calling and shouting-down. I guess they think that helps their cause.
Here's a case......
Haven't digested it.......
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=116&invol=616
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.