Posted on 10/12/2005 8:39:34 AM PDT by pigdog
TAX REFORM COMMISSION? YEAH ... RIGHT.
The president's so-called tax reform commission telegraphed its intentions several months ago when members stated that they were not going to recommend a full reform of our federal tax system, rather they were going to recommend some incremental reforms. The The FairTax Book hit the book stores and debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times Bestseller's list. Politicians and other Beltway denizens told co-author Congressman John Linder that the success of The FairTax Book was a certain indication that the people of this country were in the mood for wholesale reform. Who knew?
Now we're starting to get an indication of what the tax reform commission is going to recommend. It's very simple. Tax increases, not tax reform.
(Excerpt) Read more at boortz.com ...
Hear, Hear!! I'll drink to that ... in fact I already have.
We should also let the WH know of our views, The more of us the better.
Yes, absolutely!
I am assuming you mean by that that if there are offsetting decreases in the rate then there is no total increase.
But the so-called "Fair Tax" eliminated any preferential treatment for home loan interest and medical insurance premiums altogether.
If the reduction of preferential treatment is, in Boortz's words, a tax increase. What is the elimination of these preferential treatments? It must be a tax increase magnitudes of order greater than the commission recommends. But that is precisely what the so-called "Fair Tax" does. So Boortz is decrying the recommendations of the commission as a tax increase while simultaneously advocating even a higher tax increase.
Are you sure you want to stick with that statement? Are you sure you don't understand, as you seemed to in your first statement, that replacing those other taxes, the one's that are eliminated, with the new NRST is an offset monetarily? It is a complete change in government philosophy that is at stake, not the money. The money stays the same. How do you understand it in one case and not the other?
When it comes to tax policy, though, Boortz is often incoherent.
Be careful what you say to the Kettle, Mr. Pot.
Eliminating withholding would be as difficult as passing the NRST. Withholding is the key to the scheme called the income tax.
|
Find all 33 ways to listen to BOORtz over the web -- <<<<<<<<<<< |
But ELIMINATE tinkering and political mischief??? No, not at all, but it will greatly minimize it and make tax laws much more difficult to manipulate since a rate incorease (or preferential exemptions) affects ALL FairTax payers and not in a hidden way as with the income tax (which can easily be hidden and directed at or for only a certain group).
THe tax base gets much bigger under the nrst HR 25, allowing a lower rate to collect the same revenue. THose guys have been in DC too long.
I am on record saying that Boortz's comments are inaccurate because he only focuses on one thing (reduced deductions on current income tax). My position is that the whole package must be considered as a whole.
Even though we've established that Boortz's claim is not accurate because he did not consider the impact of the whole proposal by the committee, let's look to see if Boortz's (inaccurate) claim is internally consistent.
Reducing deductions is a tax increase (inaccurate, but stay with me). However, the NRST eliminates deductions. If a reduction of deductions is a tax increase, then the elimination of deductions must be a larger tax increase. That is why I said his argument is incoherent. The mere fact that he is an NRST advocate strongly implies that his statements will be inaccurate, too.
Add me to your ping list please
With all the spending goin on a tax increase of looming.. else how can it be paid for.. maybe Bush is waiting for Hillary to do it 2008/9 while blaming the republicans for it.. or he will sign on to a tax increase JUST before the election to ensure Hillarys victory.. which means he will be blamed not congress who passed the increase..
You left out misrepresented, fabricated, pie-in-the-sky and laughable.
| JORGENSON EXPLODES FAIRTAX MYTH (FR Exclusive) |
||
| Posted by RobFromGa On News/Activism 08/25/2005 12:40:44 AM EDT · 701 replies · 7,868+ views |
||
Wow...that was a tough call.
I read this on National Review.
It is very, very, very, very bad news, much worse than nonsense about Miers.
It is also surprising since some of the people on there would have surely supported real reform, yet they actually aren't.
Disturbing.
Anybody who thinks that Bush will reject the recommendations are out of their minds.
He made a commission because he will DO WHAT THEY SAY. He always does. He doesn't ignore it when he gets advice from a panel.
He will not come up with any of his own proposals, nor will he go beyond the recommendations and do any fundamental tax reform.
It is now officially DEAD.
No flat tax.
No NRST.
As of October 12, 2005, tax reform is dead and over.
Kinda leaves me in a quandry over who to vote for in the next few election cycles.
comments@whitehouse.gov
Exactly.
I am okay with Miers based on what I am reading.
But, this really is not okay with me. We need real tax reform.
If we don't get it, Bush will hurt his legacy seriously.
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.