"refuse to acknowledge the usefulness and utility of the 23% inclusive rate"
what the heck.
anyways, it doesn't take too much common sense/logic/math to figure out that if you stop taxing corporation and shift the entire burden on to consumers (of which the middle and lower income consumers generally spend almost all of their income) that the overall tax burden on individual will go up.
the only hope that it won't lies in (a) rich people spending more of their money than they would have paid taxes on whatever income they have, (b) employers of the not so rich passing on the hidden tax savings so people will be able to spend even more money, and (c) the expected economic boom from expanding businesses.
bottom line is the gov needs X number of dollars to operate. right now that X comes from mostly the rich, some from corporations, and bits here and there from a variety of places. under fairtax the entire X is placed on the shoulders of consumers. fair? maybe, maybe not. that's all.
i'm all for cleaning up the tax system. eliminating the irs sounds great. but to say it would be fair is questionable. it most definitely shifts the burden away from the wealth holders. (i hate how liberal i'm sounding writing this but i can't get away from the math.)
I think the APT Tax is better, but would support APT or Fair Tax, if we can get rid of the IRS.
Investing would be great because the double taxation would end.
what the heck.
www.fairtax.org. You should read THE FAIRTAX BOOK by John Linder and Neal Boortz. In it they explain how and why, under the income tax all taxes are paid by consumers. It also explains "what the heck" the meaning of tax inclusive and tax exclusive mean and how they are used. If you honestly want to understand the FairTax, you will succeed if you put forth the effort.
It takes a lot more than some people have, apparently. Not to mention the dearth of intellectual honesty.