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.
You - like the other SQLers - need to look at the real world and undertand that there are embedded tax costs that will be removed from prices.
Also, you need to realize that the FairTax base is much larger than the income tax base which will help both lower the rate and boost economic expansion as well - and very quickly.
None of uyou guys can ever admit these things since it destroys your arguments.
That's not FairMath - that's Looey-rithmetic. It's quite a different thing and completely dvorced from reality - as is your example.
Fraid Looey has done you in. Next thing we know you'll be calling mathematics and not arithmetic.
It's not that they "don't understand". It's that actually admitting they do would completely destroy their dishonest arguments on these threads. They can't admit it!!
The chart in #154 along with the textual descriptions in #151 and #155 describe the cascading effect quite well to anyone but a locked-in SQL tribesman.
Read #151, #154, and #155. The chart covers only cascading income tax and not payroll taxes or compliance costs.
I'm not looking to get ahead of anyone either, but I want the FairTax people to be honest about their proposal. If it is going to cause people that are now making $60,000 per year and taking home $48,000 to get a pay cut to $48,000 and they will still be able to buy the same amount of stuff-- maybe that's fine.
But to tell them their pay will magically go from $48,000 to $60,000 and the prices will all be the same, that is dishonest and I wonder what else they are covering up.
In either case we need to discuss the proposed system honestly to determine if it is better, or just different.
It's also clear that you don't understand cascading tax and tax costs, either. Or, more probably, can't admit it for the same reasons as all the other SQLers - it destroys their claims.
Do you agree with his analysis of where the embedded taxes are going to come from in that series of posts? (from the business owners)
Could you please answer this simple question,
Will a dollar be worth more or less than it is today in a FairTax world? (purchasing power on average) I've got $1000 in my pocket and I go to the mall, do I come back with more, less or the same amount of stuff as I can buy now?
Your approach to the debate has been anything but "honest". The links you were given tell you no such thing and in fact I doubt you've enen read many of them.
A number of the links given you were not read at least through the second thread and all the time you were claiming you "honestly wanted to know" ... Who do you think you're kidding, pal?
I'm not trying to kid anyone. Do you have an answer to my very simple question? It isn't hard.
The embedded tax works in that case, too, Nightie - and that's what you can never admit and must instead go through these torturous fibs about how everyone's pay must be reduced due to the FairTax.
It's clear in the #154 chart that embedded taxes (which in the example do not even include payroll taxes or compliance costs) can be removed and cause prices to reduce before taxes while wages stay as they are.
To get an idea of how the embedded tax costs mechanism workd, check #151, #154m, and #155.
The example in #154 includes neithre payroll taxes OR compliance costs ... only income taxes by themselved. You can clearly see how they cascade - wich the SQL lobby claims cannot happen.
"Rowing the boat ..."?? Yeah, sure Robbie!!! You've tried that one before, too.
Sounds as though you're mainly miffed at Linder for putting you off and not following up with you. Did you ever respond back with him in case he forgot (though we all know you're the most important businessman in GA, maybe Linder or his staff don't). Maybe you could try the same BS on them (in fact, maybe you did and that's why they've ignored you).
You need to see how the cascading of tax costs works. A very clear example is given in #154.
As I've said, Rob - see #154.
What you say here is nonsense.
The problem with either "scenario" you present is that they are both untrue.
You don't even understand the mechanisms involved despite have been given more than adequate links to information.
Real impressive. Too bad that is not how business works or even remotely resembles how it works. Most labor component in the US is not 5 levels away from the customer and certainly each level does not get to add 25-33% of profit on top. Even people who work in automotive plants are only one level away from the customer. The car is shipped from the factory to the dealer, and the dealer probably makes around 10% on the deal, unless he finds a bumpkin who pays sticker. If you do go a few levels back to the steel, the labor component there is such a tiny amount of the total labor that makes up a car even assuming a cacading effect that would not have a significant impact on the total cost of the car.
I would guess 80% of labor in this country is only one or two levels away from the end customer. Our economy is mostly service based and deals either directly with or one level away from the end customer. In housing the subcontactor labor is all one level away from the customer. And that effect called 'cascading' is how people make a living. The only way to reduce the 'cascading' is to have each level make less money. I really don't care what percentage I make at the end of the year, as much as I care about how much that is. And in your theory of business I would have to make less for your numbers to mean anything. Th
Also wrong and for the same reasons.
That is not at all "the FairTax position" - that's YOUR position because you adamantly oppose it and will saay anything to try to trash it.
That's dishonesty.
This is one of those sort of "Guides to the Nightmare Flat Tax" since it does not describe a real tax plan at all.
That's why Nightie gives it to you - tain't real. As for that Nightie statement that "The only things taxed on the personal level with the Flat Tax are wages, salaries, and pension benefits. Period." it's probably phrased that way to disguise the fact that "pension benefits" are actually the 15.3% (tax inclusive or 18.064% tax exclusive) that you are presently used to having withheld from your paycheck in addition to wages/salaries.
"Benefits" to describe taking money from you without you before you even see it and without our your having any control over it at all - that's a nice liberal euphemism for sure!!
Some "brenefit".
Obviously you haven't even bothered to find out what the information you were linked to contained. Much of what you post is more of the old SQL nonsense of trying to claim wages will decrease - and they won't. They'll be getting both sides of their payroll taxes.
That's been pointed out to you time and again so why keep insisting otherwise?
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.