the link won't work, maybe the site is overloaded. I will look into it.
I am not yanking anyone's chain, I just want to understand this so I can support it and explain it to people so they believe me, or I can logically discuss why I am against it.
If it is as it sounds and we can get the current costs of compliance to pay for the whole FedGov, while saving every citizen of the US including people with no income a lot of money, of course I am for it.
What I understand so far is that the FT people are claiming that the compliance money currently spent is enough to fund everything without asking the taxpayers to fork over a nickel. Everything we buy retail will cost the same as it does now, we will pay no taxes to the FedGov, and everyone gets a check every month to boot.
It sounds like a free lunch but if it works, I am all for it.
Funny I have NEVER heard any fairtaxer make that claim. What I HAVE heard them say is that on average prices won't rise or something closely akin to that.
the link won't work, maybe the site is overloaded. I will look into it.When you get to the link (it just worked for me) notice that they include federal government consumption in the base. In other words, the government is paying the FairTax to itself. They count this as revenue but don't adjust expenditures (revenue required) to pay the tax! It's as if you gave yourself a loan and called it income. Take that out and the rate goes up.
What I understand so far is that the FT people are claiming that the compliance money currently spent is enough to fund everything without asking the taxpayers to fork over a nickel. Everything we buy retail will cost the same as it does now, we will pay no taxes to the FedGov, and everyone gets a check every month to boot.Did you read the quotes I posted in #61?
Try the link again. It works for me. I know they are getting a lot of traffic with the book out. I heard they anticipated it and got a new server but they were being overwhelmed with hits!