Posted on 11/02/2005 10:09:04 AM PST by Eaglewatcher
No. That's stupid. Nobody thinks that. Nowhere will you find anyone saying such. Plain lie. You're way overboard on this one.I know it's stupid but how else could a business "embed" their income taxes? [BTW, you're way overboard with the "way overboard" bit.]
I will say it. You are lying.I'm lying when I'm giving my personal opinion of what FairTaxers seem to think? LOL! You guys are silly.
Whether you define it as "cost of production" is immaterial with respect to the requirement that the expense be paid.Whether it is an expense that must be paid is immaterial to the market price of a product.
Lying??? Stoopid??? Take your pick Nightie. One or the other since your claim is not true.
Ah, but it is not at all immaterial as the example on hidden taxes clearly shows. Those taxes are embedded into the price of the product as it gets passed from one business to another. It is certainly not "immaterial" to the sales price of the product and as you surely know many businesses sell the same item for different prices. Trying to pretend that the costs of income taxes do not become part of the selling price is abject foolishness. Most people have sufficient common sense to realize that.
Preetending that all firms have to follow the same pricing structure and practice of a single leading firm is simply untrue. They may in some cases be required to be close to the "leaders" pricing structure, but in many cases they are not at all close but follow their own practices - otherwise Apple would sell their computers at prices just like those of the many sellers of Intel-based (or AMD-based) systems. There are more ways to set your company out from its competitors other than just price alone and in doing so you'd better cover the income tax costs that have been embedded in product costs.
You merely can't afford to admit the existence of the hidden taxes since it destroys the tenuously-help positions of you Status Quo Lovers.
Whether you define it as "cost of production" is immaterial with respect to the requirement that the expense be paid.Simply put, there is no tax expense on or of production....You can produce untill hell freezes over and never pay a tax.
Lying??? Stoopid??? Take your pick Nightie. One or the other since your claim is not true.I would stay out of this, squeally, considering you've been caught lying, big-time, in this very thread.
Oh come on. Piggy does not lie, he just creates new defintion for terms. It all depends on how you define 'is'.
Oh come on. Piggy does not lie, he just creates new defintion for terms. It all depends on how you define 'is'.Right, I forgot who I was dealing with. For pigdog, when reality doesn't suit his objectives, he does his best (worst, actually) to change reality even though it's futile.
That's just because Ancient_Geezer hasn't posted for a while and Phil has been lying low. There is some good competition there.
SImple, if you've ever been in a position to assess the impact of taxes on a business. You simply increase the price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses. The result is reaching your profit goal. If you have a business that never pays income taxes, they never have a profit. That business doesn't last. Even if they have no profit in some quarter, they do have payroll tax expense and compliance costs.
If you can't cover costs, you go out of business. You continue to ignore payroll taxes and compliance costs. Are they real to you? Why else omit them from a discussion of tax costs in prices?
'Course, if you've never been involved in the real world, you are ignorant of it.
The market sets a market price. My price may or may not be that price.
The reason? My expenses may be different than others' expenses... like I might have lower or higher TAX COSTS.
Keep it up, Forrest.
Even if they have no profit in some quarter, they do have payroll tax expense and compliance costs.Not if you sub-contract out, or haven't you heard of outsourcing?
The market sets a market price. My price may or may not be that price.And why, exactly, would someone buy from you if your price was higher than the market price? Answer: they wouldn't. So you would lower your price until it matched the market price.
I admitted not that I lied (because I didn't) but that I made an error. That's far more than either you or your Squirrel nut-cases have ever done.
I've noticed that your "personal opinions" are quite frequently wrapped around, into, and throughout with lies. And you've never admitted a single one.
So, thanks for your advice ... but stick it in your ear.
SImple, if you've ever been in a position to assess the impact of taxes on a business. You simply increase the price, if possible, to cover anticipated expenses. The result is reaching your profit goal.So you jack up your price to achieve whatever profit you want. Didn't you just accuse me of lying for saying I thought FairTaxers believed this exact thing? If you could "simply increase the price," wouldn't you do that whether you were paying income taxes or not?
If you can't cover costs, you go out of business.How is it possible you wouldn't cover costs? Can't you "simply increase the price" of your products?
You continue to ignore payroll taxes and compliance costs.I'm not ignoring them, they just aren't what we are talking about.
I admitted not that I lied (because I didn't) but that I made an error.WHAT! An "error"?!? I didn't think you allowed people to make errors. It's either right or an outright lie with you, isn't it? No, this wasn't an error - you don't make errors. It was a lie. Yup, most definitely a lie.
That's far more than either you or your Squirrel nut-cases have ever done.BS. Total BS. When I've made errors, I have admitted them.
We polish the Polish furniture."No Wonder English is so Difficult to Learn!
He could lead if he would get the lead out.
A farm can produce produce.
The dump was so full it had to refuse refuse.
The soldier decided to desert in the desert.
The present is a good time to present the present.
At the Army base, a bass was painted on the head of a bass drum.
The dove dove into the bushes.
I did not object to the object.
The insurance for the invalid was invalid.
The bandage was wound around the wound.
There was a row among the oarsmen about how to row.
They were too close to the door to close it.
The buck does funny things when the does are present.
They sent a sewer down to stitch the tear in the sewer line.
To help with planting, the farmer taught his sow to sow.
The wind was too strong to wind the sail.
After a number of Novocain injections, my jaw got number.
I shed a tear when I saw the tear in my clothes.
I had to subject the subject to a series of tests.
How can I intimate this to my most intimate friend?
I spent last evening, evening out a pile of dirt. "
But don't give up despite your stumbling, ineffectual efforts - just keep on practicing (preferably in private as the noise hurts everyone else's ears).
I guess since you're the source, that must be something like outhousing, eh?
The problem with a national sales tax is that you cannot trust Congress to eliminate the income tax first.
What Congress will do (with its insatiable appetite to steal our money) is promise to eliminate the income tax, impose a national sales tax (weeee, more money!!), and then find one million reasons for not eliminating the income tax.
You cannot trust politicians when they are trying to get your money. I say No to the national sales tax, and Yes to a flat income tax rate at 16%. Screw 'em.
DA740
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.