Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Posted on 06/10/2005 11:13:37 AM PDT by Always Right
Lousbolts, today's homes contain a similar amount of tax and tax costs - and they're all recovered in the sale. Execpting distressed sales, only a stupid idiot would sell a house for less than he paid.
Why would you sell the house for less than $260,000? You wouldn't . You'd sell it for as much or more than you paid - just like today.
Next, he'll tell you that prices don't include any tax costs. Really, he will.
Where'd you get that? A monkey's butt?
Taxes still have to be paid - the same in aggregate (revenue neutrality). The tax base for the nrst is larger than the income tax base - remember all the deductions and exemptions for income taxes.
Under nrst, big spenders will end up paying a (maximum) 23% marginal rate. I think you're wrong to say that's less than now. What was Tah-ray-za's rate? 2% on 50 million?
And the government must maintain a record of those two requirements. And "ancient_geezer" in this post list quote a few more requirements. Like designating a "head of household" and listing everyone in your household and their ages. He says some people get more pre-bate than others. That's a lot more than just "two requirements."
And that's not "no records" either. And no one lists who and how this information will be verified.
Maybe not. But I am certainly not ignorant of your basic ignorance of economics.
Yes indeed and there is apparently NO help for whatever disease it is that aflicts him.
Reminds me of another quote:
Ignorance is correctable; stupid is forever! Author unknown
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
Samuel Adams
Nah! kinda like salty ole pharts like you and this here feller:
"Carlos Manuel Robles, you have been tried by twelve true and good men, not of your peers, but as high above you as heaven is of hell; and they said your guilty." "Time will pass and seasons will come and go; Spring with its wavin' green grass and heaps of sweet-smellin flowers on every hill and dale. Then will come sultry Summer, with her shimmerin' heat-waves on the baked horizon; and Fall with her yellow harvest-moon and the hills growin' brown and golden under a sinkin' Sun; and finally Winter, with its bitin', whinin' wind, and all the land will be mantled with snow. But you won't be here to, see any of 'em, Carlos Manuel Robles; not by a damn sight, because it's the order of this court that you be took to the nearest tree and hanged by the neck. The sheriff will ride off leaving you to dangle by the neck until you are dead, dead, dead you no good son-of-a-bitch!"
Signed: Judge Roy Bean
Like designating a "head of household"
No I did not say designating a head of household, neither does the bill. I merely requires the name of the person or persons the sales tax rebate is to be sent to. Don't want it don't send them a name to put on the check. Simple.
listing everyone in your household and their ages.
More like listing everyone by social security number as SSA already has the rest of the information. But you don't even need to give em that if you don't want the sales tax rebate.
He says some people get more pre-bate than others.
Yep each household receives 178 or there abouts for adults, and 65 for each child. Gee so difficult, and not even that is necessary if you choose not to apply.
That's a lot more than just "two requirements.
Requirements? What part of voluntary do you not understand.
And that's not "no records" either. And no one lists who and how this information will be verified.
Sure I have, as I said it's called the Social Security Administration. The folks that already have the information required in any case, as a consequence of current law.
You really should read the bill, instead of just emoting.
H.R.25Fair Tax Act of 2005 (Introduced in House) `CHAPTER 3--FAMILY CONSUMPTION ALLOWANCE
|
Well the guy ain't stupid.. but he could care less about the country as a whole.. I think Utopian dreams waylay a lot of good ideas.. The good idea I speak of is shit canning the barrel of spoiled apples and starting a new barrel.. Its that way with apples.. once the "germ" infects them.. vinegar is not far off.. or at the least cider.. The apple juice is a distant recollection..
(if you get my metaphor)..
Just being practical, I think.. What say Ye.?.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Whose is going to go up zero? Nobody that I can think of. SS income is taxed and that tax goes away. Interest income is taxed. That tax goes away. Those with capital gains income pay tax. That goes away.
Are they currently going to Mexico to get that $50K car for the much lower Mexican price? And when they bring it back into America and REGISTER it, they are going to get taxed. Trust me.
If you don't believe me, ask anyone who bought a new car in a state they don't live in if they had to pay the tax as if they bought it in their home state when they registered it.
Show me where in the Fair Tax bill that employers have to pay the sales tax on employees salaries.
If you can not, admit you are lying.
Why would the doctor remit anything? Salaries are not taxed under the NRST. Taxes would only be paid when purchasing retail products and services.
The 20 to 25% is cummulative from raw material to finished product on the shelf as the amount of tax and compliance expense grows from step 1 to putting product on the shelf.
Also, lower prices result in more units sold, and eventually more profit.
"Required"? I thought you said it was voluntary. Which is it?
Competition doesn't work that way.
only a stupid idiot would sell a house for less than he paid.Only a stupid idiot would think a 30% tax makes it worth 30% more than the actual value.Why would you sell the house for less than $260,000? You wouldn't
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.