Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WSJ: One Simple Rate - A flat tax would uleash a stupendous economic boom, by Steve Forbes
Wall Street Journal ^ | August 15, 2005 | STEVE FORBES

Posted on 08/15/2005 5:55:06 AM PDT by OESY

A major domestic battle looms this fall, when tax reform-- a centerpiece of the president's bold domestic agenda-- will finally be on the table. The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform is expected to release its findings by the end of September. After the political shellacking the White House took on Social Security, the administration will be strongly tempted to take a conciliatory path that supports only superficial reforms, essentially preserving the status quo of our hideous income tax code.

Such a course would have perilous consequences, economically and politically. In fact, the administration has an opportunity here to boldly retake the initiative, to recover lost political support and thrust an already decent economy into high gear and, at the same time, make America better able to meet intensifying competition from China, India and others. How? By junking the entire federal income tax code and starting over with a flat tax. A growing number of countries are doing this -- and so should we.

The current system is beyond redemption, a beast whose complexity, confusion and outright unfairness have corrupted our economy and society. Americans waste more than $200 billion and over six billion hours each year filling out tax forms. They engage in all kinds of useless economic activity intended to take advantage of the code's complicated maze of deductions and to reduce taxes -- from deducting donations of old socks to making unwanted investments. The waste of brainpower -- at a time of increasing global competition -- is incalculable.

The code corrupts our system of government by encouraging the crassest political conduct and by creating a massive, intrusive federal bureaucracy. One-sixth of the private-sector employees in Washington are employed by the lobbying industry. One-half of their efforts are directed at wrangling changes in the tax code....

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; consumptiontax; economy; fairtax; flattax; forbes; jobs; profits; steveforbes; taxes; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480481-500501-520 ... 541-560 next last
To: Mind-numbed Robot

Yeah, I'm sure there's an eeeeeeevil organization that has been paying them all to post on FR for all these years. :P

Seriesly, if the Fair Tax is so simple and superior, then you guys ought to be able to soothe other people's misgivings with an answer other than "Buy this book" or "Do more research."


481 posted on 08/17/2005 7:58:07 AM PDT by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: durasell
I'd be all for filling out my taxes on a postcard. Fine. Just as long as my pitiful salary is taxed at the same rate as the $10 million trust fund the guy down the street lives on.

Having a little class envy, are we?

482 posted on 08/17/2005 7:58:42 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies]

To: rwrcpa1; RobFromGa
It took you a week from being merely curious to being as hard nosed as Always Right and Your Nightmare.
What do you expect?. He had a simple request for someone to show him how he could reduce his price 23% and still maintain his business as usual and all he got was the standard Fairtax BS about economists, studies and name calling. He even promised to be a Fairtax convert overnight if someone could do it....

Hey RFG, It can't be done with out robbing your employees...period.

483 posted on 08/17/2005 7:59:16 AM PDT by lewislynn (Status quo today is the result of eliminating the previous status quo. Be careful what you wish for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: pigdog

I guess you've seen the light, too.


484 posted on 08/17/2005 8:00:21 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare

I thought you didn't like economic studies.


485 posted on 08/17/2005 8:03:12 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: Constantine XIII
Yeah, I'm sure there's an eeeeeeevil organization that has been paying them all to post on FR for all these years. :P

Had you labored in the vineyards of reform as much as some of us have you would know that the "usual suspects" show up on every thread posing the same disingenuous points that have been proved wrong and discredited many times. By reading this thread you will also see there are people who think they are making money by using the loopholes that are in the current law. They may be legal loopholes but they are simply ways to follow the rules the government lays out so as to avoid paying taxes. They consider avoiding taxes to be "making" money.

We say, why not just go about making money by thinking about business rather than thinking about the tax angle. Guide your own life rather than let the government do it for you.

Seriesly, if the Fair Tax is so simple and superior, then you guys ought to be able to soothe other people's misgivings with an answer other than "Buy this book" or "Do more research."

Read this thread and you will see that many, many questions have been answered and that the naysayers are disingenuous. If I could send you a pill to make you an expert on the Fair Tax I would. Unfortunately, if you want to benefit from it, or from anything else, you will have to learn about it. Is that too unreasonable? The current tax code is over 60,000 pages. Did you learn about that? We at least aren't asking you to read that.

486 posted on 08/17/2005 8:56:08 AM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all that needs to be done needs to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 481 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
One more time. What is three times my retail cost of food?

$10,000/month.

487 posted on 08/17/2005 9:02:52 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 438 | View Replies]

To: rwrcpa1
I thought you didn't like economic studies.
Whatever...
488 posted on 08/17/2005 9:04:23 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 485 | View Replies]

To: durasell

No, because they would get more of a prebate.


489 posted on 08/17/2005 9:04:47 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: durasell
Then you haven't been paying attention to the news. Federal revenues have gone up in the last few quarters, while we had tax cuts in the last two years.

Are you sure you're on the right forum?

490 posted on 08/17/2005 9:08:14 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 454 | View Replies]

To: durasell

Would anyone object to the term Status Quo Lover for this guy after this post? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?


491 posted on 08/17/2005 9:10:18 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 460 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
This has been pointed oput to you before Nightie, so you cannot honestly pretend you didn't know it.

I didn't say that in my post. You are adding things to my post I didn't say. Where did you get that?

Investment transactions ARE tax free under the Fair Tax, except for tax on commissions, which I DID say in my post. Investment dividends, income and capital gains are not taxed under the Fair Tax. They are allowed to grow tax free. Only when you spend them on a taxable item are they taxed, such as a new house. Or I can spend it on a used house tax free. But YOU did know that!

Don't ever insinuate I said something on my posts again. Get it?

492 posted on 08/17/2005 9:18:20 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 474 | View Replies]

To: Constantine XIII

If I had a dime for every time someone said the exact same thing.


493 posted on 08/17/2005 9:19:38 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: Constantine XIII

What, you want the Cliff Notes version?. How do you think we all learned about it? Reading and doing research. Quit being lazy.


494 posted on 08/17/2005 9:22:33 AM PDT by rwrcpa1 (April 15. Let's make it just another day.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 481 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa
You're WAY behind the curve Robbie. That was 30 or 40 threads ago and also included this:

"To: Always Right

You sure live up (or is that down) to your screenname, Rongie!!

That "stuff" from Gale in Brookings (an ultra left looney lib establishment) is old news as I told you. A bunch of malarkey as can be seen here:

http://www.fairtaxvolunteer.org/smart/GaleRebuttal.pdf

Get some new hitpieces!

151 posted on 07/21/2005 2:43:58 PM PDT by pigdog "

So never mind dredging up that old trash. Wasn't true then - isn't true now.

BTW where did you become fixated on a 23% embedded tax cost figure? I've seen a range of numbers that range from 10, 15, 20, 25% (or even more). Are you confusing that with the revenue neutral number presently in the bill?

495 posted on 08/17/2005 9:25:17 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 419 | View Replies]

To: durasell

No opportunity for the government to "play nanny" at all. It's up to those getting the prebate to decide how (of if) to spend the prebate.

That's one of the great a freedom aspects of the FairTax.


496 posted on 08/17/2005 9:31:15 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 424 | View Replies]

To: durasell

"It's not going to pass. It's not even going to come close to passing." DON'T BE SO SURE:

http://boortz.com/more/signings/index.html


497 posted on 08/17/2005 9:32:02 AM PDT by groanup (shred for Ian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 447 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn

You really, really don't want me to answer that for you, Looey....


498 posted on 08/17/2005 9:40:03 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 430 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa

After gaining sufficient support to pass the FairTax bill into law, it will be a cold day in hell when those speculations you hope for come about.

There will instead be monstrous opposition to that sort of thing - and there'll be no 16th amendment by then, either.

How about coming back to reality?


499 posted on 08/17/2005 9:51:21 AM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 433 | View Replies]

To: rwrcpa1
Then you haven't been paying attention to the news. Federal revenues have gone up in the last few quarters, while we had tax cuts in the last two years.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

If the increase in nominal revenues were due to Laffer Curve effects then there would be no difference in revenues as a percentage of GDP (i.e., same percentage of pie but from a larger pie), but that's not the case. Revenues in 2004 were 16.3% of GDP. In 2005, they are estimated to be 17.5%. So, it's not that the pie is getting significantly bigger, it's that the government is taking a bigger slice.
500 posted on 08/17/2005 9:51:29 AM PDT by Your Nightmare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 490 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480481-500501-520 ... 541-560 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson