Top 11 Secrets of a National Retail Sales Tax

Various | 6-10-05 | Always Right

[AzaleaCity5691]

I agree that the federal government has NO ROLE to play in taxation, be it the Federal Income Tax or National Retail Sales Tax.

This is why you eliminate all federal government except the military and the bare basic skeleton the government needs (for example, some kind of DOJ, CIA, FBI, etc), and you let each individual state decide whatever kind of revenue scheme it wants, whether or not it wants to provide a multitude of services, or no services etc. And just ask that each state contribute a percentage of whatever revenue they have to the national treasury for the basis of protecting the nation and running the most basic operations.

[Your Nightmare]

I can hear it in the board room, "Let's keep profits from growing... after all, an income tax fanatic kool aid drinker named your nightmare says it's better that way".

I don't get it. Why do you think that reducing prices leads to growing profits?

[ancient_geezer]

In the Jorgenson/Wilcoxen model, the price of labor goes down as the marginal tax rate on labor income goes down.

Clue, the price of labor includes employer side payroll taxesl. Yes price of labor goes down because employer taxes on wage and tax related costs go down, the contracted employee wage however is only a fraction of the price of labor.

The contracted wage of the employee does not go down, under conditions of the repeal of business income and payroll taxes and reduction of tax related overhead costs.

The contracted wage of the employee does not go down, with an expanding economy and expanding industial sector production.

The contracted wage of the employee does not go down, in Jorgenson's results.

[Bigun]

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)..

I get your metaphor but I'm not yet quite ready to throw out the whole barrel as I think there are a good many apples that can be saved still in there. If we don't get the baduns out REAL SOON though there won't be any option left but to empty the barrel and start over. Hopefully, I'll still be around to help ya with the job when the time comes.

[Principled]

Why do you think that reducing prices leads to growing profits?

It's increased market share that leads to growing profits.

[cowtowney]

This is a synopsis of an article from the liberal Brookings Institute.

Frequently, the assumptions of models are based on a fixed pie theory. This is incorrect.

I agree with a previous poster that said that either one would be superior to our current system.

[Your Nightmare]

It's increased market share that leads to growing profits.

Really? This is a new one on me.

I'm reminded of a time in the late 80s, General Motors had twice the sales of Ford, but Ford had twice the profits. Which would you rather be?

[expatpat]

Perhaps so, if you had been an innocent bystander -- but you weren't. You're making a meal of it -- why don't you let it go ?

[Your Nightmare]

The contracted wage of the employee does not go down, in Jorgenson's results.

There are no contracted wages in the Jorgenson/Wilcoxen model.

[Principled]

It's increased market share that leads to growing profits.

Really? This is a new one on me.

You need to get out of the textbook some.

[expatpat]

If you drop prices by 20% and your sales increase by 10%, are you increasing profits? Perhaps in your world, but not in the one the rest of us live in.

[Principled]

If you increase your sales by 10% and keep the same profit margin, you will increase profit. Hello?

[Your Nightmare]

You need to get out of the textbook some.

I've got one right here I've been reading for the past few weeks and I don't see where it says marketshare leads to profits.

[Principled]

If you increase your sales by 10% and keep the same profit margin, you will increase profit. Hello?

[coloradan]

I am as innocent as the author of this thread, who first used the term "fraudulent" in post #0.

[ancient_geezer]

There are no contracted wages in the Jorgenson/Wilcoxen model.

Total price of labor is all the taxes and costs of an employer including wage.

When marginal tax paid by the employer with respect to wages are repealed, the tax, and related factors of overhead costs go down and the total price of labor to the employer is reduced.

That however does not impact the wage the employee receives, especially in strongly expanding production, high capital investment, and resultant growing GDP environment found in Jorgenson's results.

But keep on trying YN, as more people learn of the economics of the NRST, the more they will recognise it's advantages to the nations economy, and their own futures.

[Your Nightmare]

Total price of labor is all the taxes and costs of an employer including wage.

Not in Jorgenson and Wilcoxen's model.

[Principled]

It is my position that eliminating the income tax will allow business to eliminate costs and that in competitive industries, those costs will be driven out of prices. If the industry is not competitive, they already charge without regard to competition.

That is why similar products have similar prices today. Without this axiom, there would wild fluctuations in similar products... which there aren't.

You don't find widgets for $50 right next to similar widgets for $3.

[SOSCEO]

I agree. But let's look at the sales tax. Under the sales tax the doctor must remit $150,000 for sales tax. Meanwhile, the drug dealer should remit $150,000 for sales tax on all the drugs he sold, but he won't. So in the end, the drug dealer has more money in his pocket to spend under both systems. Taxes are avoided under both system.<

But if both the doctor and drug dealer are going to buy a Mercedes, they will both be paying the same sales tax and the drug dealer WILL be taxed. If you have money, no matter how you got it, you will spend money. If you spend money, you will be taxed.

[Always Right]

You state the the NRST is flawed because it involves government taxing government, as if that isn't the case with income tax. But, it is the case with an income tax also, because government collects income tax from all its agents. The NRST doesn't have any special negative quality that the income tax lacks, it merely shows up in a different form.

I never said it is flawed. I just believe it is misleading to tout that the NRST eliminates the IRS when there will still be tax collectors at the federal and state level.