Posted on 11/02/2005 10:09:04 AM PST by Eaglewatcher
Luv'd your website and all the work it represents.
Also thought the KMA video was very appropriate.
Good work, trooper!!
Right.
That's because the coat will cost you $130, not $123.
Uh, nope, it's now $77 plus 30% ($23) which equals WHAT? Will it have a $77 price tag with people expecting to pay the 30% on top of that, or a $100 price tag with people assuming the federal part of the tax is already included? I'm not sure.
Q: I know the FairTax rate is 23 percent when compared to current income taxes. What will the rate of the sales tax be at the retail counter?A: 30 percent. This issue is often confusing, so we explain more here.
When income tax rates are quoted, economists call that a tax-inclusive quote: “I paid 23 percent last year.” If that were the case, for $100 one earned, $23 went to Uncle Sam. Or, “I had to make $130 to have $100 to spend.” That’s a 23-percent tax-inclusive rate.
We choose to compare the FairTax to income taxes, quoting the rate the same way, because the FairTax replaces such taxes. That rate is 23 percent.
Sales taxes, on the other hand, are generally quoted tax-exclusive: “I bought a $77 shirt and had to pay that same $23 in sales tax. This is a 30-percent sales tax.” Or, “I spent a dollar, 77¢ for the product and 23¢ in tax.” This rate, when programmed into a point-of-purchase terminal, is 30 percent.
Note that no matter which way it is quoted, the amount of tax is the same. Under an income tax rate of 23 percent, you have to earn $130 to spend $100.
Spend that same $100 under a sales tax, you pay that same $30, and the rate is quoted as 30 percent.
Perhaps the biggest difference between the two is under the income tax, controlling the amount of tax you pay is a complex nightmare. Under the FairTax, you may simply choose not to spend, or to spend less.
-- from FairTax FAQ #47
The $130 number is not correct either for all the reasons just stated in $#38,
In fact, the tax inclusive revenue neutral rate right now is about 19-20% ratjer than 23. that's make the t.e. rate something like 23-25%.
Without the prebate the t.i. rate would be about 3% lower so I really don't think the description "far lower" would be appropriate. This (the 3%) has shown up in several studies BTW and seems to be fairly well agreed-upon.
Wih the removal of the income tax there will actually be (rather than a deflation) a very significant economic boom which helps almost all of us.
Boortz was even forced to do a (half-hearted) retraction as a result of robfromga's findings.
Same with Kotlikoff who regularly testifies before Congress.
Nopy, Looey ... rong again!!!
Nonesuch! The book is certainly not a "proven fraud" nor has Boortz made a retraction.
That's all BS made up by you Squirrels which you all swear to. Next thing we know you'll be reporting alligators in the sewer mains in Kansas City.
Get Real (no matter how tough it is)!!
And an excellent spanking it was even thought we all know it will be completely ignored by the elitist A$$ you intended it for!
B R A V O ! ! !
What a GREAT website! Bookmarked to be regularly visited!
In my view, a fraud is something that is perpetrated to deceive on purpose. I'm 100% certain Boortz and Linder sincerely believe they've found a way to eliminate the IRS and the income tax (which hampers those of us still TRYING to get rich, NOT the rich), and are sincerely trying to get people to even THINK ABOUT getting rid of them.
If you're saying there are things in the book that are UNCLEAR, well, you're absolutely right. But what they've been putting on their respective websites are CLARIFICATIONS NOT retractions, best I can tell. Do YOU want to find a way to eliminate the income tax? Even if you don't, can you find it in your heart to cheer on those who do?
LOL. In your dreams. There was no fraud proven or even suggested. The book had a factual error about an economist's CLAIM which is just that, a claim. Fraud is sometimes in the mirror lynn.
Thankuh verrrruh muhhhh. It's nice to get POSITIVE feedback sometimes.
May I suggest you consider even saving it to disk or some backup medium just in case... ?
I can honestly say that in the last year of debating this guy he has never come across as anything but a profiteer of the status quo regarding the IT.
Starting out in pulp fiction during the '30s, Hubbard became legendary for a technique later used by Jack Kerouac in composing On the Road: He would feed a roll of butcher paper into his typewriter, then just crank out yarns-by-the-yard. He was prolific. At a penny a word, he had to be.
His spirit lives on in the "Fair Tax" spammers.
Altogether now: "We will, we will ROCK YOU!!"
If you say so.
I'm afraid that you said so.
Don't be afraid.
CATS, which has as its goal the substitution of a national sales tax for the income tax (and the subsequent elimination of the IRS), was the second.Both the Coalition and CATS were cited in a 1991 Better Business Bureau publication as "front groups for the church that is not a church." Plenty of evidence links Scientology with the early history of CATS:
# The formation of CATS was announced by David Miscavige in a cable TV program on Sept. 17, 1990. As Chairman of the Religious Technology Center, Mr. Miscavige was, and still is, L. Ron Hubbard's successor as the leader of the Church of Scientology.
Stop trying to inject a Barbara Streisand musical into this discussion.
Aren't CATS what we use to zot trolls?
I often find expired links on that page. Here's one I corrected just now:
BTW, you might like some of the stuff linked at the bottom of this page.
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.