Posted on 12/01/2004 8:25:22 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
"Under a flat income tax, the government would have to encourage more American production to increase revenues."
How would they do that .... through exemptions and tax preferences? I thought getting rid of all that was one of the major benefits of going to a flat tax.
"Under a consumption tax, the government would have to encourage consumption for more revenue."
Not really. Under a consumption tax, the much faster growth of the economy would produce more revenue.
"Also, the 'reason' he claims why he won't use his proclaimed superior tax and economic intellect to do an anti-FairTax study and take it to congress is that the FairTax (HR25) isn't going to pass anyways."
Heck, he has been challenged to defend the current system in a public debate and he won't even do that. As you know, we have a hard time getting anyone to defend the current system in a public forum. The reason is obvious - it is indefensible. It is absolutely embarrassing that we as a nation that put a man on the moon, have freed millions of people from tyranny and oppression, have developed more advanced technology in medicine, computers and other areas than every other nation on the planet combined, but we cannot implement a tax system that is efficient and puts our producers on an even competitive footing with their counterparts in other countries in an increasingly global marketplace.
Remember, this is the system that Jimmy Carter referred to as "a disgrace" when he campaigned for President in 1976 - more than a quarter century ago now. In terms of its enormous complexity and staggering compliance costs, it is far worse now than it was then.
I'll get down off my soapbox now. I can't wait to see this debated on the floor of the house of representatives and the senate.
"My point has been that no one can predict the economy."
Therefore we should make no attempt to adopt pro-growth economic policies, since we have no way of knowing which ones actually are pro-growth, right?
With that statement you have conclusively demonstrated your complete lack of economic understanding!
You've made predictions.OK, I'm getting the hang of this. You make a unfounded claim, I ask you to show me an example, and you say "If I don't know of any I must be mentally disabled." Got it.
It's just a simple question. Do you think the labor supply can increase 30% in one year?So here's a question for everyone. Who here thinks the labor supply can increase 30% in one year?Why that question? Why does that matter?. Did you say that if X happened you predict that the "labor supply" would have to "increase 30% in one year"
Heck, he has been challenged to defend the current system in a public debate and he won't even do that.And I've told you many times I don't support the current system. This a FairTax Kool-Aid drinker tactic. If you don't think the FairTax will make your wife's boobs bigger and firmer you must be a Commie income tax lover.
"If all of the sudden this premium jumped to 30-35%, demand for 'used' houses would jump, therefore raising prices."
The premium won't jump to 30 - 35%. The FairTax has been very well thought out in this regard and residential real estate prices will be relatively stable - as stable as possible given a change of this magnitude in the federal tax system.
Therefore we should make no attempt to adopt pro-growth economic policies, since we have no way of knowing which ones actually are pro-growth, right?Of course not. There is a difference between believing a plan will have positive effects on the economy and predicting specifics. But don't go around telling people that prices will drop 22% and the GDP will increase 13.2%.
With that statement you have conclusively demonstrated your complete lack of economic understanding!OK. So tell me how a VAT is different to the buyer than a NRST (other than a VAT would probably have a lower rate because it's harder to evade).
The premium won't jump to 30 - 35%. The FairTax has been very well thought out in this regard and residential real estate prices will be relatively stable - as stable as possible given a change of this magnitude in the federal tax system.We know this because it sez so on FairTax.org! Just shut up, crv16, and drink your Kool-Aid!
"I'm not in favor of replacing horse manure with cow manure. They both stink. There are better options."
Such as what .... a flat tax? Would you like to defend the flat tax in a debate?
I thought this was to be coupled with a dividend paid out monthly...somewhere in the neighborhood of $900 a month to cover those people below the poverty level. Once you have used up that allotted "tax exempt" money you are responsible for everything that you spend over and above.
And does this apply to services, i.e. Electric, water, cable services, telephone?
Just curious. Although the initial sticker shock would probably cause an uproar, I could handle getting my whole paycheck and paying taxes on what I spend. This would be a huge incentive to save, put money away for retirement, etc.
Such as what .... a flat tax? Would you like to defend the flat tax in a debate?I would prefer a VAT, but the flat tax would be better than the FairTax in a lot of ways.
"There is a difference between believing a plan will have positive effects on the economy and predicting specifics."
Indeed there is. However, in order for Americans to make informed decisions, they have to have some ideas about orders of magnitude with respect to positive benefits. I doubt many people would be satisfied with a statement that said "we are confident that prices will come down as we remove the costs associated with the current tax system from the pricing equation. We have no idea how much they will come down, we just know they WILL come down." In fact, the 22% is an average. I have seen the chart which shows, by industry, what percentage of the price is the tax system's burden. It will vary slightly (within 4 or 5% from the 22% average) depending on the specific industry involved.
I think that most reasonably intelligent people know that these are estimates and there is a margin of error, just like there is in political polling. Political polls typically have an MOE of 3-4%. Is our MOE greater than that? Probably. But that doesn't mean that we should not make a good faith attempt to quantify the changes that we anticipate.
The goal is to provide the best estimates that we can and let informed Americans use those estimates to make up their minds about reforming the system.
YN: I don't believe I've made any predictions. My point has been that no one can predict the economy. 512
Zon: You've made predictions.519
I ask you to show me an example, and you say
You want to continue your assertion that you asked me to show you an example? Below is your entire post. I don't see anywhere in it that you ask me to show you an example of a prediction you've made. Correct your error.
What rationalization will you offer this time?
|
To: Zon
But you'd have the reader believe that your predictions are better than a man that can run circles around you.I don't believe I've made any predictions. My point has been that no one can predict the economy. So here's a question for everyone. Who here thinks the labor supply can increase 30% in one year? 512 posted on 12/03/2004 4:34:33 AM PST by Your Nightmare
|
The thing that bothers me most about a high percentage NRST is that it is going to massively change buying behavior. People already change behavior in order to save 5% (Mass shoppers coming to tax free NH). Can you imagine the behavior change when there is a 23-30% tax? Nobody can accurately predict it.
A low rate transaction tax would not be enough to change behavior, nor would it be enough to justify evasion.
You misread my post. I was going to ask you to show me an example but realized it was pointless.
YN: You make a unfounded claim, I ask you to show me an example, 526
Zon: You want to continue your assertion that you asked me to show you an example? Below is your entire post. I don't see anywhere in it that you ask me to show you an example of a prediction you've made. Correct your error.
What rationalization will you offer this time?537
YN: You misread my post. I was going to ask you to show me an example but realized it was pointless.
I didn't misread your post. Quote yourself wherein you asked me to show you an. Or, correct your error.
You won't post a quote to back up your claim nor will you correct your error. What rationalization will you respond with this time?
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.