Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

National Retail Sales Tax - You gotta be kidding!
GOPNATION.COM ^ | January 31, 2005 | Steve Pudlo

Posted on 01/31/2005 7:12:16 AM PST by bmweezer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 961-980981-1,0001,001-1,020 ... 1,261-1,278 next last
To: Conservative Goddess
Think about the logistics of doing this. How would you exempt this money without tracking all expenditures and withdrawls from these accounts? Do you want to re-impose an Orwellian tracking and reporting system?

If it has to be done for the limited time period when there are pre-NRST savings accounts laying around funded with after-income tax dollars, fine with me. I'll fill out the forms. I'll have the time when I'm retired.

I have been planning on a certain retirement using my after-tax savings. I have been counting on this money being more valuable than the same amount of money that someone earns because I don't have to pay income taxes on it. Therefore, for example, the annual $50,000 I allow myself will go farther and I will be able to have the same lifestyle as someone who "earns" much more.

The NRST is taking that advantage away from me.

Yes, there are taxes built into the products I purchase under the current system. Those who earn money pay those costs, too. They, however, will also pay an income tax I don't have to pay and that will allow me to live on less (and get more).

It's not just the absolute dollars I have or the taxes that I pay, it's how it compares to what others have and what taxes they pay. That helps establish what my dollars are really worth.
981 posted on 02/01/2005 10:01:02 AM PST by BikerNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 723 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham

Simple is my middle name


982 posted on 02/01/2005 10:03:57 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (If only I used my evil genius for good !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 941 | View Replies]

To: CSM
I'm not really in Ecuador. Too many volcanoes.
983 posted on 02/01/2005 10:12:22 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (If only I used my evil genius for good !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 975 | View Replies]

To: socialismisinsidious
Have to wonder how much you are losing by not itemizing but I digress...there are other cost besides money; maybe some day you will be audited and then you can find out first hand.
I do itemize. What's the big deal? I don't sweat every penny I could deduct, but so what.
984 posted on 02/01/2005 10:22:48 AM PST by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 973 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
I don't understand. Why would they up? And why is that a good thing?

They would go up because, unlike American made products, who would be relieved of the Federal tax burden they bear under the FaitTax throughout the entire production tree, prior to having the burden put back on them at the point of sale, imports have no tax burden on them now, so there is nothing to be relieved, but will still bear the burden of the FairTax. So they will have a net increase in purchase price of 30%.

The good thing is because it will reverse some of the negative effects the cheap chinese imports have had on our economy. Particularly, because it will tend to regain some of the marketshare lost to cheap imports, it will allow American goods to come down in price, and become even more competitive.

985 posted on 02/01/2005 10:25:55 AM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 980 | View Replies]

To: OHelix
They would go up because, unlike American made products, who would be relieved of the Federal tax burden they bear under the FaitTax throughout the entire production tree, prior to having the burden put back on them at the point of sale, imports have no tax burden on them now, so there is nothing to be relieved, but will still bear the burden of the FairTax. So they will have a net increase in purchase price of 30%.

Less than that, I'm sure. Even imports have to be shipped, warehoused, marketed, sold, etc. -- those are all domestic activities that would be subject to taxes (and associated costs) under the current system.

986 posted on 02/01/2005 10:27:59 AM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 985 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC
I have been counting on this money being more valuable than the same amount of money that someone earns because I don't have to pay income taxes on it. Therefore, for example, the annual $50,000 I allow myself will go farther and I will be able to have the same lifestyle as someone who "earns" much more.

I really think you have a fallacy of logic here. You don't have to pay income tax on it because you already have. You are esentially comparing your $50,000 income (having already paid tax on it) to someone making $50,000 before taxes and saying that your money is worth more. This is not a valid comparison. A valid comparison would be comparing your $50,000 which you have already paid tax on, to someone who made $50,000 after taxes. And the value of those monies are the same.

Where there IS an inequity is where your neighbor has his savings in a tax-deferred account, and will benefit from escaping taxation on it's balance when the FairTax is implemented. HE will have more value for his income than you will, because yours will have been taxed and his will not have been. This is an inequity in the existing system, as you have already paid taxes on your savings, and your neighbor has postponed it, to the point where he doesn't even have to now. The FairTax has no bearing on this inequity. If you both went and withdrew your balance and ran to Mexico never to return, the same inequity would exist.

987 posted on 02/01/2005 10:40:40 AM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 981 | View Replies]

To: Le Seigneur De Porc; Conspiracy Guy

Is your real name Carl Levin?


988 posted on 02/01/2005 10:40:41 AM PST by CSM ("I just started shooting," said Gloria Doster, 56. "I was trying to blow his brains out ....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 474 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

"She would have 30% more money but things would cost 35% more. There really would be no more money."

Imports would cost more; US produced goods would cost about the same (after-tax). This would shift consumer preference in favor of domestic produced goods and create millions of new jobs for Americans.


989 posted on 02/01/2005 10:42:13 AM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 422 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom

You are certainly right.


990 posted on 02/01/2005 10:43:50 AM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 986 | View Replies]

To: OHelix
You are certainly right.

It's a burden, but I manage. :)

991 posted on 02/01/2005 10:47:06 AM PST by kevkrom (If people are free to do as they wish, they are almost certain not to do as Utopian planners wish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 990 | View Replies]

To: OHelix
I see your point, but I think my criticism is fair. I think the bottom line is that I am being penalized for delaying my gratification. Those who have spent their money and have "stuff" don't have to worry about it, but I do because I had the gaul to save it.

This is how many if not most after-income tax savers will see this, as a second grab of their money. Do you really expect them, us, to buy into this hope of lower prices at the same time we are told that we will be taxed 30% on money we already were taxed 30% on?
992 posted on 02/01/2005 10:50:27 AM PST by BikerNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 987 | View Replies]

To: SCALEMAN; OHelix

Now I know what all of the unemployed IRS workers and tax accountants are gonna do...they will all be opening up booths in flea markets... and running continuous garage sales.

LOL, at least until they run out of used stuff to sell each other, and have to run out an buy some more new stuff so they can sell it as used.

Come to think of it isn't that should be right up their line ;o)

993 posted on 02/01/2005 10:53:30 AM PST by ancient_geezer (Don't reform it, Replace it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 951 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare

"I've never been able to find any of these papers...."

And I have never been able to find any source which even documents your preferred form of tax reform, much less any economic studies.

Help us out, YN. Post a link to your preferred form of tax reform. And while you are at it, tell us again that you aren't fighting for the status quo.


994 posted on 02/01/2005 10:54:36 AM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: CSM

He's dead CSM.


995 posted on 02/01/2005 11:00:29 AM PST by Conspiracy Guy (Naked Mole Rats have feelings too. Be nice to them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 988 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
that's it?

OK...if you don't really care, if your money isn't a big deal, if you don't sweat it...then why would care about tax reform at all? why care if we had the fair tax, flat tax or an income tax?....."What's the big deal?"
996 posted on 02/01/2005 11:00:59 AM PST by socialismisinsidious ("A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 984 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC

"...It's not just the absolute dollars I have or the taxes that I pay, it's how it compares to what others have and what taxes they pay. That helps establish what my dollars are really worth...."

That's absolutley correct and speaks directly to my previous post, wherein I said: "The ball to keep your eye on here is total purchasing power."

You seem unconcerned by the fact that your investments are suffering reduced ROI as a result of the current system of taxation. That impacts your ability to consume in an invisible way that is impossible to accurately quantify. Moreover, 15.3% of your wage is being confiscated as FICA / Medicare taxation, and the government has no obligation whatsoever to return any portion of that to you. If you are concerned about your standard of living while in retirement, those two facts should cause you great concern. The FairTax eliminates both of those impediments to your ability to provide for your retirement.

Because the FairTax is calculated to be revenue neutral, it will by definition take NO MORE MONEY from the economy than the current system. The difference between the two systems is that in our current system, the taxes that you pay are invisible and unquantifiable in gross total. Under the FairTax you will not suffer a degredation in your total purchasing power, but you will be able to calculate your total tax burden because the tax will be fully visible.


997 posted on 02/01/2005 11:03:32 AM PST by Conservative Goddess (Veritas vos Liberabit, in Vino, Veritas....QED, Vino vos Liberabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 981 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC; Conservative Goddess

Just think, if you supported the disbanding of SS then the rate could be significantly lower. Therefore the double taxation wouldn't be as painful. Would you be willing to sacrifice your lifetime contributions to SS to allow for it to be comletely torn apart?

Also, your double taxation issue is really no issue. Yes, you will pay a direct sales tax which substitutes for the embedded tax in the price of goods you buy anyway. Would you prefer the tax to be visible or hidden?


998 posted on 02/01/2005 11:03:49 AM PST by CSM ("I just started shooting," said Gloria Doster, 56. "I was trying to blow his brains out ....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 521 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare

"Other than the quote of Dr Jorgenson saying the AFT's rate is too low do I having any quote of Dr. Jorgenson saying the AFT's rate is too low? No, just the quote of Dr. Jorgenson saying the AFT's rate is too low."

What does Dr. Jorgenson say about your rate calculation?

Oh, I forgot, you don't have a rate calculation yet.


999 posted on 02/01/2005 11:04:20 AM PST by phil_will1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 490 | View Replies]

To: BikerNYC
This is how many if not most after-income tax savers will see this, as a second grab of their money. Do you really expect them, us, to buy into this hope of lower prices at the same time we are told that we will be taxed 30% on money we already were taxed 30% on?

I'm afraid you are absolutely right in that is how many will see it. But the reality is that that view is, in fact, a misconception. Some who oppose the FairTax will undoubtedly encourage that misconception at every opportunity, but it's still a misconception.

I think the bottom line is that I am being penalized for delaying my gratification. Those who have spent their money and have "stuff" don't have to worry about it, but I do because I had the gaul to save it.

You are exactly right. But I hope you realize that it is the savings-unfreindly system that we have now that is the problem, and that the FairTax fixes that problem. I wish, for your sake, that it could have fixed it sooner.

1,000 posted on 02/01/2005 11:05:07 AM PST by OHelix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 992 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 961-980981-1,0001,001-1,020 ... 1,261-1,278 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson