University Economists review "FairTax"

Americans for FairTax ^ | current | University Economist listed in article

[pigdog]

So, let's see - your theory is that everyone sells the same thing at the same price sort of automatically???

Darn, wish I'd have known that when I paid $1.27 for those same cough drops that were $1.02 at a different store. It sure is noce to have such an edycated economic type advising us. (Be sure to let all the stores know that, too, since some appareently aren't too steeped in your theory).

[pigdog]

Show us, say, four errors that you have admitted by giving us links to the spost on these threads where you've lied made errors. You actually have quite a large body of work to choose from.

[Principled]

Not if you sub-contract out, or haven't you heard of outsourcing?

So your subs don't have payroll expenses either eh. Right....

[Principled]

And why, exactly, would someone buy from you if your price was higher than the market price?

Variations in quality, consumer preference, myriad reasons.

Why do you think all prices of a good are not the same? Milk can go for $3.25 or $3.89 or $2.99.

It is preposterous for you to assert that only one price will sell.

[lewislynn]

So your subs don't have payroll expenses either eh. Right....

I don't know, maybe they sub too or maybe they're in another country eh.

[Principled]

So you jack up your price to achieve whatever profit you want.

No. That's stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. That's not what was said now, was it?

How is it possible you wouldn't cover costs?

When costs are greater than available funds. You are how old?

Can't you "simply increase the price" of your products?

You can if you like, but you cannot price to the extent of eliminating sales - because sales revenue is the only indefinite stream of cash flow with which costs may be paid.

[pigdog]

Actually, trusting Congress has nothing to do with it and is not required.

You should read the bill, HR25:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.25:

It states clearly that it ELIMINATES the income tax (and several others), the appropriate parts of the tax code, the IRS (and defunds it as well), and requires the income tax records to be destroyed. Trust is not inbvolved. It's all in the bill which, when passed, would be the law.

You 16% "flat tax" isn't really flat at all and also includes payroll and withholding so it is really a 31.3% "flat tax". Why would anyone prefer that to a 23% (or less) FairTax???

[Principled]

I'm not ignoring them, they just aren't what we are talking about.

Everyone else is, you are too - but you are omitting them from your discussion exactly because they demonstrate the folly of your position.

The income tax system does indeed impose costs on business. Those costs in turn increase prices. That you reject this fundamental idea is laughable. You really think anyone is with you on this?

You may ignore tax costs if you like, but they remain an expense to business that ends up inflating prices.

Fool.

[Principled]

Your position is that costs incurred by a business aren't ever paid. You do see how stupid that is, don't you?

[Dead Corpse]

Some folks aren't interested in what is right, logical, or factual. They want to protect their own bacon at any and all costs.

Arguing with them is pointless. You can't convince someone the sky is really blue if they deny reality.

[kellynla]

Damn, Eagle...you've got some kind of record going for a thread. LOL
what's this? 13 days and counting...
KEEP IT UP!

[lewislynn]

Your position is that costs incurred by a business aren't ever paid.

Where did I make that my position? Is hiring sub-contractors taking a position to not pay costs?...Wouldn't paying a sub-contractor be a cost?

You do see how stupid that is, don't you?

I only see how stupid you look in your pathetic attempts to make everyone else think you're the smartest person in the room.

[pigdog]

You're right, of course, but it's both good phun and good exercise.

Besides, the hope is that others will learn more about the FairTax and how valuable it will be for our country. Couldn't care less about those who are already "lost" to the income tax system.

[Eaglewatcher]

Remember that the income tax started as a flat tax. The nations sales tax keeps the tax in front of the people all the time, there is no hiding it, no withholding and then a check returning some of your own money but making many people think they are getting something back.

[Eaglewatcher]

It is just a great issue. I believe that we are ready for a revolution in the tax system.

[lewislynn]

Principled:

"SImple, if you've ever been in a position to assess the impact of taxes on a business. You simply increase the price,

YN: So you jack up your price to achieve whatever profit you want.

Principled

No. That's stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid. That's not what was said now, was it?

Yea, that's exactly what was said and it's stupid, stupid, stupid to deny it.

[kellynla]

oh, I couldn't agree more and we appreciate you keepin' it on the "front burner"

[pigdog]

And it's Looey, Looey, Looey for you to post such trash.

[Your Nightmare]

So, let's see - your theory is that everyone sells the same thing at the same price sort of automatically???

My "theory" is known as a "microeconomics" and it's not really mine. It's been around for quite awhile. I'm surprised you haven't heard of it before. It's pretty basic stuff.

[Your Nightmare]

Show us, say, four errors that you have admitted by giving us links to the spost on these threads where you've lied made errors. You actually have quite a large body of work to choose from.

First, you assume I've made four errors. Second, I'm not about to waste my time weeding through months and months of posts trying to find the very few where I made errors.

You, on the other hand, can't even admit you were in error for years in your interpretation of Jorgenson's work. You still continue to stick with your error to this very day (at this point it's just another one of your lies).