Posted on 02/03/2005 9:54:12 AM PST by EternalVigilance
I am quite certain that CHIEF negotiator is here in this room with us!
Most of them are nuts aready actually. This will just drive them to . . . to drink? Har har.
Hey, man, I'm not Catholic, but if I had a patron saint, it would be Herb!
"Visualize whirled peas!"
*grin*
I am not particularly worried about my butt but am worried about an economic collapse incident to implementation of this tax which would mean rates well into the 30% range.
We already pay almost 10% in Chicago and adding another 28% would be crushing to almost every industry. I know you are a true believer in this but I see nothing but trouble coming from it.
You got that right. I received the call to action from my fellow fairtaxmichiganders and they were kind enough to provide me with Carl Levin's contact information. I don't think I'll waste my time.
A NRST is definitely a VAT. It is a single stage VAT applied at final consumption. It affects the economy in the identical manner that a sales tax does. Identical because they are "economically equivalent".
The "value" of the sales tax base is the total value of the good. A VAT merely breaks the value of the sales tax base into its components. That trivial distinction is the ONLY distinction between the two.
I agree that would be a disirable outcome, I'm not sure if the FairTax accomplishes that to a great degree. However, it does say that interpretation SHALL "construe any ambiguities in this Act in favor of reserving powers to the States respectively, or to the people." Certainly it moves things in the right direction, and eliminates the direct tax which at least gives a state shield between me and the federal government.
I think the only thing that will change the dynamic you mention is to vote the socialists out of office, or at least make them so much a minority we can undo the damage they've done over the last century. Eliminating the progressive income tax system we have now should go a long way in that direction. Maybe not as far as the FlatTax, but enough, I think, to make the needed differnece.
if enough of you fairtaxmichigander call your RAT congressman the only good that might come of it would be that he could count the number of his constituents that won't vote for him next time.
""No kidding?
I trust there's an "R" behind his name?""
Actually the Libertarian Party has been pushing this for years.
But if it take a "R" behind his name for people to take it seriously the end result is the same for me.
A VAT is a sales tax. An NRST is a sales tax. An NRST is NOT the same as a VAT.
Get it? I know it doesn't fit your agenda, but tough cookies...
Actually, I figure they can fight against it and show more voters that the interest is in continued theft of earnings. If that comes to light the final stake will be thrust into their party.
Taxes are too high in Chicago, that's for sure.
But the fact that the Daley machine is lining their pockets shouldn't prevent us from breaking the chains of the income tax.
The rate offered for the FairTax is the revenue neutral rate...in other words, that is the reflection of what we are SPENDING now.
Yours is a poor argument against a plan to fix HOW we tax.
We should not sacrifice future freedom on the altar of keeping our current tax load hidden from the electorate.
Unlike you, I believe the implementation of the FairTax would produce a boom unlike the world has ever seen.
The building blocks of prosperity are savings, capital formation, investment and productivity, all of which this change will spur immediately.
Capital and jobs will flow here, because the burden of the current system will have been removed.
His website references that he is a "proud Detroit Democrat", if that tells you anything. The only thing that will come from calling his office is getting put on a re-education hit list. Of course, I love the state of my state right now. Tied for last in unemployment, the Detroit mayor is getting caught in all kinds of needless spending, and many more. I love to laugh at the dems who are proud that MI went for JFnK and tell them that their dreams are coming true with the state of the state.
It's so easy to prove them wrong when their heros are doing the work......
Unless you're showing any sign that you're taking into account the tax relief resulting from the lifting of the income tax, it's hard to take your objections seriously.
(by the way, income taxes could still be levied without the 16th amendment, in case of war or other emergency; they'd just have to be apportioned among the states according to population)
Hello to you too, sweetie.
I've been in a few discussions concerning the real estate market and the FairTax, and while I can't claim that everyone agreed, there was at least some begrudging acknowlegement that the result would not put a 30% wedge between the price of new homes verses used, but would tend to increase the value of used homes relative to new to close the gap. Also new homes would not increase price by 30%, as there would be some tax savings from eliminating the previous tax system to offset at least part of the 30% tax.
Those who were being built or which had been built but not sold at the time of the FairTax implementation are eligable for a credit. I'm not too familiar with that part myself. Perhaps AG could explain it better.
"seriously? tied with whom? Mississippi? To what do you attribute the job situation in Michigan? The unions?"
Tied with Alaska. I attribute it to the Governor's constant tax, tax, tax, tax and tax some more talk. That's what happens when you elect a Canadian Socialist to your Governorship.
Okay, I can buy that.
Although when people refer to a VAT vs a Sales Tax, I think we both understand the distinction. It's a differnce I guess in technical vs common terminology. Am I mistaken?
bump for later
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.