If the employee is only getting the same paycheck, then he's getting screwed, because he himself has to now pay the employer's share of the FICA tax, which is now in the sales tax. See #60.
Sorry, but you're operating under a fallacy that the tax distribution will remain the same. It won't. Under an NRST, many people who currently operate tax-free (or close to it) will be subject to taxes. A good example of this is under-the-table workers (illegal immigrants), who don't pay income or payroll taxes now, yet would subject to the NRST when they buy things. Also, since they aren't legal residents, they wouldn't be eligible for the FCA, so their effective rate would be the marginal rate.
Also, you'd have the economy expanding -- especially exports -- due to the removal of disincentive to production and a more competitive pricing of U.S. products. Regardless of the actual dollars involved, the real key is purchasing power, which should go up under the NRST as compared to lide under the income tax.
Assuming that you are not another incarnation of LL or YN and are just confused . . .
You are confusing the terms 'earning' and 'keeping'. Right now, the worker loses 20 to 40% of his income to the tax man before he gets it. Under the FairTax, he will keep 100% (except state and voluntary deductions). The Fed gets ZERO from him.
Are you with me on this?
"If the employee is only getting the same paycheck, then he's getting screwed, because he himself has to now pay the employer's share of the FICA tax, which is now in the sales tax. See #60."
He has to pay it now; it is imbedded in the cost of his consumption purchases. There is no free lunch. COnsumers ultiamtely pay all taxes anyway, the FairTax just makes it more visible.