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

Skip to comments.

NUMBER ONE ---- AGAIN!(The Fair Tax Book)
Nealz Nuze ^ | 8/18/05 | Neal Boortz

Posted on 08/18/2005 6:34:27 AM PDT by GPBurdell

NUMBER ONE ---- AGAIN!

The word came in yesterday afternoon. The FairTax Book will remain No. 1 on the New York Times Bestseller's List for the second week in a row. Our editor at Regan Books told us yesterday afternoon that it is much harder to make this list the second week than it is the first. Needless to say, we're excited and gratified. Interview requests for Congressman Linder and myself are pouring in, and the crowds at the book signings remain strong.

Our greatest hope is that the book generates a buzz and momentum of its own. Across the country people who have never heard of The FairTax before are learning that it is possible to get rid of all income and payroll taxes and replace those taxes with a one-time tax on consumption at the retail level. These people are learning that:

* They can say goodbye to the death tax, the gift tax, Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes, the Alternative Minimum Tax, capital gains taxes and the trouble of filling out tax forms; * That they can just go enjoy themselves on April 15th, just as they do on every other spring day; * That American corporations who have fled overseas to escape our crushing tax system can be brought home again; * That they can invest and save with no federal tax consequences whatsoever; * That the trillions of dollars that are working in offshore financial centers, again to escape our crushing taxes, can be brought back to work in the American economy again; * That we don't need to spend $500 billion a year to comply with an obscene tax code; * And that all of this can be accomplished while eliminating the federal tax burden on the poor, and without increasing the cost of living for everyone else.

I was discussing the book with some friends last night. I told them that over the past ten or so days I think that I have signed about 8,000 copies of the book at various book signings. Since many people buy multiple copies of the book, I would guess that I've seen about 6,500 people during that time. So .. how many people had something negative to say? Two. That's it. Just two. One man at Ft. Bragg came through the line twice to have two books signed (he went and bought an extra copy) all the while grumbling that we didn't include enough of the research in the book. Well, there's a reason for that. You can find the research at the FairTax website. Knock yourself out, pal. One other man stood in front of the table and demanded an opportunity to point out all of the typos he had found. We politely declined his incredible offer. But that's it. Two complaints. On the other hand, we've received hundreds of comments from people who doubted whether or not this idea could work ... until they read the book. Well, that's what we were after.

Again ... thanks so much for another week at No. 1! The FairTax is becoming an idea that can't be ignored.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: boortz; dianetics; fairtax; flimflam; linder; lronhubbard; neverhappen; scientology; taxes; taxfraud; taxreform
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 441-455 next last
To: RobFromGa

tick tick tick

crickets chirping
sagebrush rolling

hmmm....

how much longer can it take you?


201 posted on 08/20/2005 3:05:39 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
You said the service charge would go from $75 to $55...that's a big change to the provider...

Li'l jumpy eh?

The point is that today, to keep $55, he has to charge $75. The reason is hidden tax the consumer must pay.

Under the nrst, the consumer has t pay about the same $75 of which tax is paid and is labeled as tax on the receipt.

Why are you opposed to having consumers be more aware of their tax burden?

202 posted on 08/20/2005 3:15:35 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
Do you believe this? Principled says his example shows how a service can reduce their price without reducing wages and when we explain that the guy in the example is reducing his wage, he says "Yeah, but he's taking home the same amount"! Too funny

Your appeal to ridicule is telling.

First you should provide your definition of "salary" that you're using to your minions. They may be disappointed when they find out.

Second, your characterization of my post is preposterous.

The post indicated that a random service can collect largely the same fee from consumers after nrst and keep the same profit.

There has been no disagreement there. Why not?

For if the random retailer/service provder can collect the same before nrst and after while retaining similar profits, why would anyone need more money to pay for anything?

203 posted on 08/20/2005 3:20:56 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
And for the 1000th time, tax costs include MORE than the taxes themselves.

And tax costs include MORE than compliance costs you've pointed out.

Why do you continue to refuse the existence of costs of the income tax system except taxes pe se and some of he compliance costs? Do you really deny their existence?

204 posted on 08/20/2005 3:23:38 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
...a decision made based solely on...

Look up the word.

205 posted on 08/20/2005 3:24:32 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Lousbolts
How much longer can it take you to reply!? You simply drop off the thread when you're confused about your illogic?

Crickets chirping

sagebrush rolling

See how stupid you look when you do something like that? I'm too human to allow your continued ridicule.

206 posted on 08/20/2005 3:37:20 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Your Nightmare
It wasn't the exact same product. That would be stupid.
207 posted on 08/20/2005 3:58:21 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa
The problem crops up when you say people will get more pay

They get their contracted rate - just as now - but now, income and payroll taxes are withheld. Under the nrst, there is no tax withheld. Taxes still have to be paid (did you think otherwise?) - but they aren't withheld.

208 posted on 08/20/2005 4:01:44 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: RobFromGa
I went to buy a new set of tires for my car, they were marked 20% off and it said EACH. I only needed four but that would only be an 80% discount,

That's LEWISMATH!!!!!!!

209 posted on 08/20/2005 4:02:46 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: groanup
He's they guys who calls cspan/rush/etc and says, "I am really arepublican - honest!...."

Easy to spot from day 1 of his FReepmail recruitment.

210 posted on 08/20/2005 4:04:52 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: groanup
You are not honest...

True of the antireformers in general. Pick a lie, repeat it over and over, namecall, ridicule, ignore obvious rebuttals, etc.

The other is pick a random detail and argue it. That's phun.... I guess they think the world is stupid (they sound a lot like the libs these days eh?).

211 posted on 08/20/2005 4:08:01 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
How does one give "testimony" on the workings of something that's never existed?.

So now you admit that no nrst exists. Good. Next 5 times you say it's in Europe I'll recall this post.

212 posted on 08/20/2005 4:09:49 AM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
So which "testimony" is the lie? The price reduction? Or the 100% paychecks....HMMMM?

You know as well as I do that the cost of employment is greater than the employee's hourly rate, because of matching SS expenses. (7.5%, IIRC-calculated as an exclusive rate, or inclusive, I don't know.) If that goes away, the employee gets the full hourly rate, the employer pockets the gain, and the cost of production drops. So both are true. Competition takes care of the rest.

If that doesn't convince you, maybe we could get Harry Reid to contribute some of that retirement money for more research!

213 posted on 08/20/2005 4:20:43 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (Fairtax.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
"Since producers would no longer pay taxes on profits or other forms of capital income under the NRST and workers would no longer pay taxes on wages, prices received by producers, shown in the sixth chart,would fall by an average of twenty percent.

That's part of there double accounting of benefits that I have been harping on for years. Of course they are only double-counting about $1 Trillion worth of benefits, no wonder they show a 10.5% growth. That error alone takes them down to 0% growth.

214 posted on 08/20/2005 4:54:25 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Principled
True of the antireformers in general. Pick a lie, repeat it over and over, namecall, ridicule, ignore obvious rebuttals, etc.

ROTFLOL....oh puh_leeeeez. That is the patented method of fair taxers. You could sue us if we stole your patent.

215 posted on 08/20/2005 4:56:55 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Principled
And for the 1000th time, tax costs include MORE than the taxes themselves. And tax costs include MORE than compliance costs you've pointed out.

You speaketh with fork tongue. What more is there??? Explain oh wise one. I have included every penny of tax business owners would see. I have included every penny of the overstate complinace costs that you guys quote. Excuse me, but what other 'tax costs' are there????? I am $1 TRILLION short. Maybe if I just added the 100% fair tax fudge factor I could find $2 Trillion worth of savings to business owners so prices could come down 20%. I for one think the reason Jorgenson no longer has his name on the fair tax proposal is because they grossly misrepresent his data. Dr. Jorgenson could not go along with the LIE that employees get to keep their full paycheck and prices come down 20%.

You guys need to produce Dr. Jorgenson orginal study that explains what exactly is meant by 'embedded taxes'. Your numbers are a fraud.

216 posted on 08/20/2005 5:05:14 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
You know as well as I do that the cost of employment is greater than the employee's hourly rate, because of matching SS expenses. (7.5%, IIRC-calculated as an exclusive rate, or inclusive, I don't know.) If that goes away, the employee gets the full hourly rate, the employer pockets the gain, and the cost of production drops. So both are true.

Saving 7.65% on labor costs to the business is nice, but that amounts to roughly $350 Billion. For prices to come down 20% on a tax base of $10 Trillion, business owners will need $2 Trillion worth of savings. We have always granted you $350 Billion on that point, but you still must find $1.65 Trillion more. No matter how much you exagerate compliance costs and business taxes, you are still over $1 Trillion short of meeting your little fairytale. Are you saying business owners are going to take $1 Trillion less in profits????

217 posted on 08/20/2005 5:12:37 AM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: groanup
Anything you have to say from now on will be subject to the BS meter and will probalby fail

That started from the first question. I do have an honest approach to the debate, I did research the links, the links tell me that the wage earners and business owners will NOT be able to keep all of their current money 100% once the income taxes are removed. This is honest.

It is dishonest to say that everyone will get to keep 100% of their money, IMHO. I am saying that as a business owner, and if I were an employee I would recognize that my pay was likely going to take a hit.

And as I've said before, that might be an OK tradeoff for the current IRS and income tax. But we need to be honest about it because it is a major change and people need to be ready for the "less salary but no taxes means same takehome and same prices so I'm just good off as before" thinking.

To continue to delude all the wage earners in this country that you'll get 100% of your paychecks, plus prices will on average be the same, plus you'll get a monthly prebate is dishonest and pollyanish.

My first post on this subject recently said basically how can everyone win? who is paying for this and where does the money come from? I still have no answer to that question except I suspect that it is the business owner now who is expected to give up his 100% and pass along his income tax savings to the FedGov.

218 posted on 08/20/2005 5:42:13 AM PDT by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: groanup
I just wish you wouldn't advertise the fact that you are from Georgia because most of us who live here fanatically support the fair tax.

I disagree with most, I agree with "fanatically". If you dismiss everyone who questions your plan as a nut, then I can see where you consider yourself morally and intellectually superior.

You should be incredibily ashamed of yourself. You are not honest nor are you worthy of a screen name on this forum. You are ESPECIALLY not worth of a screen name that includes my state.

Well, I'm not ashamed of myself, nor am I planning to change my screen name. Nor am I planning to leave the Forum. You FairTax fanatics should find answers to these questions because they will need to be answered before your plan has any chance of passing.

The only threads where people are so sure they are right that I have seen are the Schiavo threads, and the evolution/creationism threads. FairTax is similar in that it is faith-based and relies on messianic viral marketing.

219 posted on 08/20/2005 5:49:16 AM PDT by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: Principled
The $55 he has left has already had tax paid in BOTH cases.

Except of course for the second case where he still has to pay the FairTax on every purchase.

220 posted on 08/20/2005 5:50:51 AM PDT by RobFromGa (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran-- what are we waiting for?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 441-455 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