Posted on 08/24/2005 9:40:44 PM PDT by RobFromGa
but gross pay is not gross outlay to an employer. Anyone who has ever met a payroll knows this. Gross outlay in terms of moneys paid out is at least 5% higher than gross pay.
I don't know what I think about "fair tax," with my exposure limited to one talk by Boortz on the way home from work one night -I have not read the book. However, the cost to employers is HIGHER than the gross pay..., just to get that point straight.
Our first editions might be a collector's item when they make the necessary revisions to the FairTax Book.If they make the necessary revisions, there won't be a FairTax Book. ;-)
Read #19 again, it was a response to someone elses comment that they would be fine with a NRST plan that essentially didn't remove embedded tax costs from domestic businesses. Under that scenario, the relative cost advantage given to domestic goods would no longer exist.
Under the plan the way that Dr. Jorgenson understood it, the domestic business was reducing its costs, and was gaining an advantage over the foreign business.
"ok, thanks for stopping by" is offensive?
Sounds like you are awfully thin-skinned. If you took even half of the name-calling that we get for daring to question whether there might be oh a trillion or a trillion and a half missing from the FairTax plan as described by the FairTax book, we are jumped on.
Your argument does fall into the "Anything but the IRS" way of thinking, and you are for a plan with now-obvious major problems, yet you still say you are for the NRST.
Well, you say you're not here to see this response anyway.
How about you ask the moderators to remove your #21 in which you claim I am making all this up with a fake email address now that you have been proven to be incorrect in #25 and #29.
Thank you. I will be interested in their response.
Ok keep living in your fantasy world. While the Fair Tax Book remains number 1 on the Best Sellers. You can smug all you want, and so will I because I know my side is gaining ground. If you are so right, then why don't you call Neal's talk show?Here's an idea! Boortz can have Jorgenson on his show and read passages from his #1 book and ask Dr. Jorgenson, "Now that it's printed and #1, is that correct?"
I haven't been mentioning this issue that you now bring up very much, but there has been a lot of change in the past ten plus years both in the tax code and our global trade picture. I agree that the numbers all need to be redone in order to move forward.
thanks for the bump
you and I know that Jorgenson is not going to appear on Boortz's show because Neal Boortz is not going to go through that embarrassment.
Hint: Most professionals I know have several different email addresses, since often every group, department, and affiliation will have their own email address domain, and hand out userids to their various members.
The Employee's withheld taxes are not the Employer's, they are the Employee's..
They are merely withheld by the employer as required by Federal / State Laws..
Part of those funds (presently withheld) are "owed" to the government agencies as "taxes"..
If those taxes are no longer extant, then they should go to the Employees, not the Employers..
It was the Employee's money in the first place..
The Employer still benefits from not having to pay matching funds into withholding..
That is all the savings they are due..
I see no rationale for expecting Employees to end up with only the Net pay after taxes, if no taxes are being withheld..
They shoud be recieving their full paycheck, the Gross Pay..
I would agree that "something" is being misrepresented here..
I'm just not sure what..
I think you misunderstood the context. He was talking about no tax savings from elimination of employee's tax. Since employee tax accounts for over $1.3 Trillion of the $1.9 Trillion of taxes collected, without businesses being able to realize that $1.3 Trillion worth of savings, prices can not come down significantly to cover the new sales tax.
You know what the FairTax plan is. Let me tell you what it is not. The FairTax is not a "something for nothing" tax scheme. We aren't promising you extra dollars in your pocket or a new car in your driveway. The promise is simple. Your earnings will remain essentially the same, and you will spend essentially the same amount for your consumer goods and services. You won't pay taxes on your investment earnings, nor will you pay taxes when you give money away as a gift. Your heirs won't pay taxes when you go tango uniform and they inherit the wealth you've worked so hard to acquire. You won't fall victim to the Alternative Minimum Tax or an IRS audit. You will be compensated at the beginning of every month for the FairTax you would be expected to pay during that month on the basic necessities of life, as set by the poverty level for your sized household. As they say, "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch," and that applies to the FairTax, unless you want to consider treating April 15th as just another Spring day as something you get for free.
Sounds like furious backpedaling to me.--RobFromGa
That is not the point. The point is how does the employer realize the $1.3 Trillion worth savings from the taxes the employee now pays. Without the employer seeing those savings, the employer can not significantly reduce his prices.
Yes it does add up. You have to remember the stupid people did exactly the same thing years ago with the Social Security tax. The tax withholding was out of hand and visible to the voting public so they "hid" 1/2 of it by reducing the actual witholding from the paycheck and forced the employeer to pay the other half. The stupid "sheeple" had been sedated even though they didn't realize that the money the employer was forced to pay was in fact, money directly out of their pockets.
The only fair tax is a tax on retail sales with no exceptions to the tax. Other than that, it can be manipulated by politicos and will quickly become the exact copy of our IRS fiasco we now have.
I'll be watching this thread closely. Like I said recently, (I think it was to you), the idea that someone comes out ahead after the FairTax is passed isn't really appealing to me. It would be nice, but that's not what I'm looking for.
Transparency in the tax rate, and the perceived pain of the tax burden on each person, is worth more than money. These results will lead to a foundational shift in the minds of the dependency class for the good of America- and it will undo decades of creeping Communist advances.
That's why I favor the FairTax, and I think we agree on this. But yes, it needs to be tested and prodded at every point. No surprises!
And that is how the fairtax should be sold, on its merits, not on some fairytale.
I appreciate your support, but it does not add up. Never did.
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.