Posted on 09/15/2005 7:03:21 AM PDT by groanup
I take it then that you want two slaughter houses imposed on us??
I just wish that these so-called 'Fair Taxers' would just ONCE comment on the transition phase between two different tax systems. Or else you will end up paying BOTH.
OXYMORON CHECK: 'Fair Tax'
He is attempting to shoot straight and he seems successful. He did however, fail to list compliance costs as an embedded cost of the present system. Not only is that a big cost, it is also one thing that makes the present system so odious. Not only is the gathering and keeping of information a burden but the information itself which is supplied to an already overly Big Brother government is almost a complete outline of a persons personal history. And some folks worry about the Patriot Act??.
Yes, that is my right to stick up for my interests. There are millions of Americans who do not make out with the fairtax.
2. BS. You are, once again, misrepresenting what is being stated.
No, you fail to understand the signficance of what is being stated. The debate over whether employee taxes were included in Jorgenson's 'embedded tax' number has been a huge point of contention. One that totals more than $1.3 Trillion a year. This one slight of hand amounts to fairtaxers misrepresenting the economic impact of the fairtax by nearly 10-15% of our GDP.
They could do that yes. They could also continue to pay you your current gross salary but not have to pay the matching employer taxes. Or they could lower the costs of the goods or services they provide to the consumer.
They could do some combination of all the above. We have to remember that all they dynamics will change, but basic capitalism will not. If an employer chooses to keep all the extra money, but some other corporation doesn't and decides to pass on that money to employees and/or lower the costs to the consumer, then that makes employment at the other firm more appealing and makes that firm's product more appealing to the consumer.
All the dynamics will work themselves out it the free marketplace. It may not happen overnight, but they will level out.
I'm a big FT supporter but I think Boortz is dancing with a hyena here.I'm not sure what "dancing with a hyena" means (should I?), but it seems clear that Boortz didn't understand Jorgenson's research when he wrote the book.
As a small biz owner, I'd pay my employees whatever is fair market rate, taking into consideration: no more withholding tax, higher sales tax, etc. Eliminate the IRS and you have my vote. Period.
Not at all most likely. I my own little self pointed this out several times on these threads and that had little impact on support for the plan. The elimination of the cost of withholding, the cost of complying with the present system, and the elimination of business decisions made strictly for tax purposes more than offset that. With the elimination of those costs it is possible for prices to be lowered. It most fields competition will see to it. Add to that the prebate on the taxes paid for necessities and the consumer is back even in his everyday life but with a much improved attitude toward the world and our government.
Thanks for your intellectual input. Should we start blockading our ports now or wait for Christmas?
Thanks for playing...
Sticking up for your interests is one thing. Screwing the 100-200 million of the rest of us just so you can keep playing the current system is despicable.
No, you fail to understand the signficance of what is being stated. The debate over whether employee taxes were included in Jorgenson's 'embedded tax' number has been a huge point of contention. One that totals more than $1.3 Trillion a year. This one slight of hand amounts to fairtaxers misrepresenting the economic impact of the fairtax by nearly 10-15% of our GDP.
No. It represents your misrepresentation of the facts so that you can keep playing the current IRS system to get your tax breaks. For still others, they LIKE a progressive tax scheme.
Keep cheerleading for keeping the current IRS system in place. That'll win your side a lot of converts 'cause everyone loves the IRS.
Part of HR 25 is the destruction of all government held IRS records. A lot of people would breath easier with a nice, completely annoymous, tax system.
Your cheerleading a 30% sales tax making phoney claims is despicable.
No. It represents your misrepresentation of the facts so that you can keep playing the current IRS system to get your tax breaks. For still others, they LIKE a progressive tax scheme.
No my facts are rock solid and undeniable. BTW, go visit the fairtax FAQ, they admit the fairtax is a progressive tax scheme too.
Correction: The Fair Tax will not only capture the underground economy, tax cheats....
When I do a service for $130, I can legally only keep $100 and must remit the $30 to the state. I have $100 to spend. When a drug dealer/prostitute get $130 they keep $130 and have $130 to spend. They cheated the fairtax system $30.
"dancing with the hyena" means you get eaten when the music stops.
I'm beginning to believe that Boortz and Linder mis-spoke entirely and missed by a mile the greatest benefit of the fair tax. I don't believe that once the IT is eliminated that employers are going to make some arbitrary decision on how much to pay their employees. They pay them their gross - PERIOD.
The net result is that everyone's income goes up. The employer no longer has compliance costs, FICA, income tax liability. The employer will have SOME room to lower prices. I think that is in the neighborhood of 10-18&.
If all goods and services suddenly become tagged 20-30-% higher in price due to the NRST, there will be a transition period where retail sales will lag. In order to jump start those sales, sellers will lower prices.
Joe Blow has his whole paycheck which is probably 15-20% more than it was before.
But,guess what, if Joe's car needs repair unexpectedly he can defer paying taxes for a month or more. He can buy used and he will be getting his pre-bate for necessities.
Under today's system Joe doesn't have a choice. He has to pay those taxes every month. So he has to give up something, maybe his monthly contribution to his IRA. Under the FT he can give up paying Uncle Sam for a while.
Us fair taxers are accused of double dipping on this issue and now that has been clarified you aginners are guilty. It is not logical to assume that prices will be unaffected by reduced costs. The market takes care of that.
However, for the sake of discussion, assume you are correct. After a short while the market will again level things out. If prices go up and people can't buy then products will sit on the shelf and services will go unused. That will cause prices to drop and the increased economic activity will cause a greater demand for labor. That in turn increases what employers will pay for workers and things are settled back down again.
Let the market work. It is self-correcting and eventually benefits everyone. The Fair Tax does that. The present system is indirect central control and top down government management of the economy. That is a failed system everywhere it is used because it is designed to benefit the controllers, not the consumers. The market is the Golden Rule in operation, by necessity.
In the case you describe, prices must go up. The only way prices don't go up under the so-called "Fair Tax" is if employers reduce your gross pay to your current net pay. And if employers reduce your gross pay to your current net pay and prices don't go up, you are in the same position you are today.
No they weren't! They love it! It gives them a charge. :-)
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.