Dear groanup,
" You're still talking about SS here. That is not the discussion. My question to you was: what about tax policy? What is yours?"
I told you, groanup. If you don't like my answer, that's fine. It doesn't change my answer, which is, until you start to resolve the problem of the size of the federal government, you're addressing the wrong question.
If what you're saying that it isn't politically feasible to do the right thing, that doesn't mean we should go off and do the wrong thing. I don't believe that the transition to an NSRT would do less than badly harm the economy, possibly permanently, as long as the government is trying to collect 20% of GDP that way. I also don't believe that collecting 20% of GDP in that way would be anything less than very harmful to the economy, even on a steady-state basis.
"A couple of hundred years ago an entire nation was in upheaval. That nation adopted a set of laws that put all of the power in the hands of the people who dwelled in that nation. That had never been done before. Can you imagine the havoc and mania that should have occurred?"
Actually, the period between the beginning of the Revolution through some time after the adoption of the Constitution saw plenty of havoc and danger and difficulty, plenty of disruption and upheaval, death and destruction, and loss of fortune.
"Well, it worked."
Yup. It worked. Not without great cost. Nonetheless, it worked, and it's still working. Even economically.
While most of the rest of the world struggles, we seem to keep chugging along.
That's a key difference between now and 200 years ago. Two hundred years ago, things really WERE broken.
Today, there are things that could work better, but our economic system is far from broken. It is still the envy of the world.
From my perspective, you want to implement a proposal that I believe actually will break it. You don't see it that way, of course. If you did, you would oppose it, because you're a loyal, patriotic American, at least, from what I can see.
But so am I. And my perspective, that comes from my own experiences, experiences of a business owner of 20 years, experiences of someone with some formal knowledge in the matters at hand, experiences of an experienced, long-term investor, experiences of someone who has seen ideas come and go all my life, experience that tells me that 1. much of what is being promoted here is just fiction; 2. what is actually true and good about an NSRT isn't enough to put at risk an economic system that mostly works, and works better than mostly anywhere in the world.
I've tried to hammer at the fictions presented here in these threads. Seventeen percent embedded corporate income taxes. * chuckle * A small business owner's personal income taxes are now his business taxes. LOL!
That these and other proven fictions are bandied about by the proponents of the NSRT, and appear to be little questioned by any of you does not inspire confidence in me that your judgment is superior to mine.
I see neither the crisis that you see, nor do I see in the NSRT the solution to the problems we actually do have.
sitetest
So we shouldn't go off and do the wrong thing you say. Well? The right thing is? Keep it like it is? I know there are people on this thread that would certainly like to do that. It was once said of some of them that they sell "How to Avoid Income Tax" kits. I believe it.
You see fiction in the embedded taxes, you see fiction in the economic effect.
I ask you again a question you have so far eluded: what would you do? Do you favor staying with the current situation or do you favor some form of reform? If reform, what? If status quo I have a pot full of acorns for you.
You guys don't really get the idea. You unleash the spirit of free people and you DON'T impose a tax upon their efforts. You impose a tax upon their decadence. It really isn't that hard to understand. If the fair tax isn't the way to do it what is? Or would you guys prefer to continue to tax my wages and profits?