Posted on 01/31/2005 7:12:16 AM PST by bmweezer
If it means I won't get taxed twice on that money, hell yes.
Now I understand your viewpoint. Personally I prefer to keep government at arms length, for the issue by my sights is a moral one not one of economics, so I forgo the audits myself.
However putting that aside for the moment, that tax will paid twice now, under the current tax system and any other tax system that involves business remitting taxes to government such as Flat Tax, VATs, tariffs, luxury and use taxes, ...
That is a problem that has been set up by the income tax not one inherent to a retail sales tax.
DO YOU PAY YOUR INCOME TAX
AT THE SUPERMARKET?
by D. Sherman Cox J.D. L.L.M. Taxation
Do not dub me shapka broham, is a lot to remember.
mark to me for later reading
Would jimmy hatches be taxable?
I saw that.........later gator!!!!!
what a lot of working type people don't understand is that the millionaire set that live on their inherited investments do not pay social security taxes on that income and they actually pay little on their investment income, as in capital gains....at the very least, its a smaller percentage than what the money as a wage would require....
when people say that the "rich" pay most of the taxes in this country, the idea that most of the rich have their "incomes" protected is left out of the conversation....
My money that I work for is my property. BTW, the American Revolution was fought over a sales tax of sort.
John Galt, is that you?
Keep in mind the problem causing this is that your savings are being taxed. The FairTax ends that. Once it's emplemented, you no longer will be taxed on savings.
CG's points are also valid. There should be very little difference in the value of that cash under the FairTax verses under the current system. Especially in the long run. It is even possible it would end up being more valuable under the FairTax than the existing system.
If you have heirs, there are further advantages to the FairTax as it eliminates inheritance and death taxes.
A dang good living too!
The math is 17.6% / .84 = 20.95%, call it 21%. That leaves the difference of 2% (a roughly 10% overage) to cover evasion, et. al.
Not to mention that current evasion and the underground cash economy is not accounted for in GDP, that makes for a 10% buffer over current tax revenues with current levels of evasion.
The math is 17.6% / .84 = 20.95%, call it 21%. That leaves the difference of 2% (a roughly 10% overage) to cover evasion, et. al.You forgot the FCA.
You've been here before, haven't you?
You and I have met before..
well, no.....you have to have shoes and clothes and school supplies for your kids,period.....
I don't know whether the NRST is a good idea or not, but please don't say that items needed for your children or for daily living are an OPTION and not NEED......
This plan hurts the most those people who have saved a lot of money with after-tax dollars.I'm new to this idea, but I don't think it would hurt tax-deferred accounts such as a 401(k)s or Conventional IRAs -- in fact, as I understand it, it would be a boon to holders of such accounts -- but it would hurt non-tax-deferred savings.
Cherry, read futher down this thread, these issues are covered.
That's part of the Fair Tax and I'm not so sure I like it, although I understand it. I was talking about the generic retail sales tax.
I suppose I could decide that my privacy was more important than the rebate?
Shalom.
:)
-good times, G.J.P.(Jr.)
Additionally, think of what would happen when the current workforce that is totally devoted to sheltering income (I've heard as much as 33% although I don't know how accurate that is) start doing productive work instead.
It could revolutionize every economic model we have.
Shalom.
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.