[Bigun]

"My point about price is that if there is no profit after tax.....the item isn't sold. Taxes are factored into the equation to see if the widget even makes it to market.

Preciesly so and the exact reason American produced products, which would otherwise sell like hotcakes in world markets, do not sell! This idiotic MARXIST tax system we currently labor under puts such a burden on our products that they cannot fairly compete.

[lewislynn]

This idiotic MARXIST tax system we currently labor under puts such a burden on our products that they cannot fairly compete.

Sorry to burst your tax bubble but taxes aren't the problem. Taxes are minute compared to all the other government regulations at all levels.

If you want to be a champion for business, then you should be stomping your feet and beating your fists over regulations, not taxes.

The ADA alone is a huge cost to business if not a killer.

[Conservative Goddess]

I think the economics/finance professions call this hurdle rate of return.......

If the after tax profit doesn't meet the hurdle....it doesn't get manufactured in the US....maybe offshore.....but not in the US.

[Final Authority]

So now, all the opposition to the farttax is because we espouse the Marxist tax system we have now? That must mean we are Marxists? Like those who espouse secure national borders and controlled immigration are "racist", right?

Many times on this and other threads, your people, the proponents of an additional taxation system, since the IRS and the income tax will never go away, have offered conflicting observations of the present tax and the so-called farttax. I 'll summarize.

One, it has been often said that the present tax isn't inclusive individually enough, ie, too much of the tax is paid by too few people. Farttaxers have said this. They have also said that because of embedded taxes in goods and services because of the income tax whether you desire to pay or not or whether you earn or not, you are paying. I and other reasonable opponents say you can't have it both ways.

Two, it has been said on this thread by your proponent friends that the present tax is too regressive, ie, a "rich" guy like Ted Turner, "only" paid $15 million on a $200 odd million income. In the former example, your proponents claim it is too progressive and then in the latter it is claimed that it is too regressive. Which is it?

Since it has been concluded that everybody already pays a tax when they buy something then why would you argue that now we need an additional tax to get everybody to pay taxes when they buy something? I'll answer it for you. The government needs more money, the Boomers, as they retire will be paying much less in income tax than they did, that the government needs the Boomers money, that the proponents of the farttax want the Boomers money, that the way to get the Boomers money is to make them pay a tax on everything they spend on money they saved for retirement.

This shows me at least two things, generational jealousy by the weak and useless X'ers, and the insatiable need for more of our money by big Government politicians and bureaucrats.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Total nonsense. Europe, for example, has higher taxes than us. Their economies are stagnant because of the tax burden.

If we exported much more the inflation rate would soon bring us back to the stagflation of the 70s.