National Retail Sales Tax - You gotta be kidding!

GOPNATION.COM ^ | January 31, 2005 | Steve Pudlo

[Conspiracy Guy]

I don't know anyone on either team.

[RobRoy]

>>That is not an explanation.<<

No you are right. It is a reason. 8^>

[Badray]

The more I'm reading, the more I'm liking.........

That's the natural reaction to an honest reading of it.

Those who object usually have some narrow self interest that they are trying to protect. That is natural to a degree too, but very shortsighted.

[Gabz]

BTW, one of the strong arguments (and I mean REALLY strong) for home ownership is the deductibility of your interest and real estate taxes.

I've owned a home since 1992 and have never once deducted mortgage interest or property taxes. Of course I don't have a $250,000 mortgage.

As I said before the current tax structure CONTROLS my SPENDING this proposal will allow me to CONTROL the TAXES.

[Badray]

For such a lousy article, it has generated considerable heat and light. Thanks for keeping an open mind, Gabz and thank both of you for all of the love. I rarely get that here. ;-)

[Gabz]

LOL!!!!!!!

You know me well!

[robertpaulsen]

Fine. If that's your goal, then screw the NRST and go with a 20% import tariff.

Same thing.

[OHelix]

Not the same thing. Somewhere in the middle. But I would certainly rather have import tarrifs than what we have now for the reasons described above.

Incidentally it would have to be a lot higher than 20%. There is some talk of putting a 27% tarrif on Chinese exports if they don't clean up their act regarding tying their currency to the dollar.

[Gabz]

I learned that it may not be perfect, but it is damn good.

I'm quickly learning the same.

I would still like to find some way of decreasing the size of the leviathon we call government........but that's another subject for another thread.

[Judith Anne]

You're welcome. ;-D

[RobRoy]

I agree, and love the concept of the sales tax.

But I don't think it's gonna happen.

[Gabz]

Get rid of all except the domestic end retail sales tax, and our goods would be more competitive in price overseas.

I see that as an inducement for more domestic manufacturing. Which of course is a good thing as increase in any business sector, expecially manufacturing creates domestic jobs, which increases tax revenue due to increased spending by more people working.

Hopefully the folks openning these new businesses will take pity on the newly unemployed government bureaucrats!!!! LOL!

[OHelix]

I would still like to find some way of decreasing the size of the leviathon we call government........but that's another subject for another thread.

Maybe not another subject... The progressive income tax we have now is what has allowed politicians to get away with increasing federal spending, and to overstep it's constitutionally limited functions and get into all sorts of things which should be left to the states. Two important issues here:

1 - The progressive nature of the income tax means fewer people feel the pain of taxation. Both the less-progressive quality of the FiarTax and the greater visibility of the cost of governement will tend to make increasing federal spending less popular, and cutting federal spending more popular. I assume you understand this concept very well having been a supporter of the Flat Tax.

2 - The direct taxation has allowed the federal government to bypass the states and go directly to the people's wallets, then offer back that money to the states on the condition that the states do things the way DC wants them done. The FairTax does not eliminate this dynamic, but does alter it the direction of taking power out of DC and putting it in the hands of the people and the states.

[Badray]

When you have to add 30% (or more) at the register you will think twice about working and buying things 'off the books'

You forget one thing in your assumption -- the very key phrase in any economic situation.

All things being equal.

If this was the imposition of an additional tax, you might very well be right. But it is not an additional tax. It replaces a tax that current takes 40% to 50% of our gross incomes. This tax will take 30% of our taxable expenditures. All things are not equal.

Do you not see the difference?

[Gabz]

And with the IRS you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent.

Which is just not right IMNSHO.....been there done that with them. I helped someone close to me find help with a problem with them. $3,500 bill...paid over $19,000.....they wanted another $25,000.......they agreed to $3,500. Legal extortion.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

That's okay.

I don't have a television set, so I can't even watch the darn thing.

[Badray]

This is perhaps the most insightful, yet succinct description of the bottom line benefit from the FairTax and worth repeating boldly:

Under the current system I must control my spending because I DON'T control the taxes. Under this proposal I still control my spending but by doing so I DO control the taxes.

[iconoclast]

One question.

WHO is fairtax.org

Things like that bother me.

[smokeyb]

I agree. Kudos, Gabz