Posted on 02/22/2005 4:22:02 PM PST by groanup
There's no proof of that.
Oh please, don't make yourself look the fool, but....
Did it stop Bill gates?...Steve Jobs?...Donald Trump?...Martha Stewart?...Mr's Fields Cookies? and on and on.
No!
Why?
Because they don't listen to the idiocy of the Phil_Will1, OHelix, and groanup's of the world, that's why.
The richest people of the world are rich BECAUSE of expansion in America.
Did it stop Bill gates?...Steve Jobs?...Donald Trump?...Martha Stewart?...Mr's Fields Cookies? and on and on.
No!
Why?
Because they don't listen to the idiocy of the Phil_Will1, OHelix, and groanup's of the world, that's why.
The richest people of the world are rich BECAUSE of expansion in America.
LL you have forever lost my respect. You are not one of us. Go your own way and crouch to lick the hand that feeds you. I'm sorry but your agenda has been outed. You are uneducated and uneducable.
The Tax that bothers me is the income tax, also estate taxes, capital gains tax, and others, that can be totally replaced by the APT TAX.
.003 on transactions does not bother me, its simple and spreads a thin layer of taxation over a wide body of financial transactions.
And could you explain why you call the APT TAX "Socialist Friendly".
Could not ANY TAX be called Socialist Friendly?
Its easy for politicans to spend the money and of course they will spend all the money coming in, so any increased tax revenue will be spent and not given back, is anybody surprised about that?
So,I fail to understand the argument that .003 is a hidden tax or a Socialist Tax.
Government spending and deficits don't bother me, especially during time of WAR. Government spending will always increase, again, lets not delude ourselves. Our focus is on changing the way we are taxed. Implimenting a new less complicated tax system, that does not require any compliance by the average citizen. A tax that will unleash the real power of our great economy, and stimulate Growth.
The NRST in my opinion would be good, if it was implimented at 10% or less.
The drafters of NRST and the Fair Tax have suggested a rate of 30%, and labeled it revenue neutral.
Revenue Neutral is the kiss of death, because everybody focuses on "replacing revenue" and not growing the economy.
.003 on transactions does not bother me, its simple and spreads a thin layer of taxation over a wide body of financial transactions. ***
Hide the cost of government, guesswhat:
"It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?"
---Walter Williams
Furthermore even the tax rate you quote is improperly stated as it is actually double that for each transaction:
APT description by proponents:
. The projected potential APT tax base for 2005 would then be $428 Tril., permitting a revenue neutral flat tax of .57 percent on all transactions or .28 percent on each (buyer and seller) transactor to replace projected 2005 Federal and State tax revenues.
Both sides of every transaction are taxed as well as every transaction necessary to move your payment through the finacial system, whether visible to you or not.
The fundamental reality is that the 0.6% cascades throughout the entire economy and filters down to the citizen in excess of 30% of his nominal income. Under the APT 99% of the tax system is buried from the perceptions of the electorate.
And could you explain why you call the APT TAX "Socialist Friendly".
You answer the question yourself "Government spending and deficits don't bother me"
The APT would just add to that "don't bother me attitude" of yours, a VAT on steriods, no accountability of government to the voter for lack of electorate concern.
The Honorable James DeMint (R-SC)
United States House of Representatives
APRIL 5, 2001
- "There has been a shift in the relationship between individuals and government, he argues, such that fewer and fewer are paying taxes at the same time that more and more are receiving increasingly generous benefits. If it becomes the case that most voters do not bear a financial burden for this largess, then there will be little to restrain--and significant political incentives to encourage--the continued growth of government.
To remove perception of the tax burdens of the individual, is to remove the goad which assures accountability of government to the electorate. Liberty and freedom have a price, responsibility. If the perception of cost of government is avoided there are no brakes on the growth of government, the ultimate result is the end of freedom through creeping socialism.
Please note as well the fact that the APT involves the states giving up their power to tax to the federal government relying solely on grants and funding from the feds instead while taking monitor every phase of of the entire economy:
APT description by proponents:
The estimates above are based on 2005 revenue and transaction projections. Implementing the three phases will require several years and careful government management, especially the third phase.
Then, it will take several years to rollout, especially Phase III involving central collection and distribution to the States.
Revenue Neutral is the kiss of death, because everybody focuses on "replacing revenue" and not growing the economy.
Your APT claims to be revenue neutral and by taxing both sides of every transaction, assures that government has full access to the accounts and financial details of the life of every individual and business in the nation thus the potential for hammerlock control over the entire economy and means of production.
APT description by proponents:
The tax rates required for a "revenue neutral" tax are divided into three phases which are the result of a suggested implementation plan that would gradually replace virtually all Federal and State taxes.
"Makes YOU wonder how we got to where we are and why we're so much better off than anywhere else in thew world..."
That is a good point, but I can assure you that it isn't because of the efficiency and fairness of our tax system.
"Of course, unlike almost anywhere else in the world, if you don't like it here you're free to go to wherever you think it might be better."
True enough, but I am also free to work toward positive and constructive change within our system.
"Government spending and deficits don't bother me, especially during time of WAR. Government spending will always increase, again, lets not delude ourselves."
"Revenue Neutral is the kiss of death, because everybody focuses on 'replacing revenue' and not growing the economy."
It would appear that you have just confirmed my biggest concern about the APT tax, which is that it isn't revenue neutral at the tiny rates proposed and therefore
1. it would increase the federal deficit, and
2. it isn't politically viable.
If you try to pass on a massive tax cut under the guise of "tax reform" you immediately lose a huge portion of the legislators who you need to get something done. The same would be true if you proposed a tax reform that would significantly increase taxes and eliminate the deficit.
Those supporting the APT have insisted in the past that the proposal is revenue neutral and I have always been skeptical. I am glad that the truth is now out in the open.
When I used the term "socialist friendly" I was mostly thinking in terms of our current system, not specifically the APT tax, but I was certainly not excluding the APTtax. I'm sure I don't know enough about the APT tax proposal to come to a confident conclusion in that regard.
What I was responding to was your assertion that "Spending cuts will not happen, so GROWTH of our Economy will be the only way", and pointing out that the real problem is that our tax system has allowed us to become, to a great degree, a socialist nation, and that economic expansion alone would enable, and arguably result in, further socialization of our nation, which would compound the problem rather than fix it. So my point was that economic expansion without restrictions on government's ability to expand will not fix the problem.
Could not ANY TAX be called Socialist Friendly?
Yes, but only because any tax is socialist friendly relative to no tax at all. There are, however, some forms of taxes that are MORE socialist friendly than others. Most notably is a "heavy progressive or graduated income tax", which the Communist Manifesto treats as a chief strategy by which to "wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State."
We all want change in the Tax System, but you have attached a label of hidden tax to the APT TAX why is that?
One of the ways the progressive income tax allows for socialist expansion is by removing the visibility of taxation from a large class in a society, creating a large class of people indifferent to the cost of government expansion since they feel that someone else is going to pay for it.
The APTtax.org own FAQ acknowledges the following as a negative feature of the APTtax: "Public insensitivity to expansion of government budgets and commensurate regulation".
Thanks for that post. You guys constantly impress me with your ability to reference relevant information so quickly.
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.