Posted on 02/14/2006 4:55:43 PM PST by Eaglewatcher
mmmm fairtax
We'll all be dead before we see this day.
Unfortunately, it's also time to imagine pigs flying.
(I'm all for it - just don't see it happening anytime soon)
The best that can be done is to remove low-income people from any U.S. income tax bracket and very gradually move that income level up.
Imagine paying a 40% sales tax.
*cough* 23%, and the embedded taxes in products are dropped. Prices shouldn't be more than +1-2%
And paying no income/payroll taxes.
And paying to tax on investment income.
Sounds good to me.
It's revenue neutral, FC. So the only way for it to be 40% is if we're paying about that now. ...
WHAT? People don't know the tax burden is so high? How could that be?
Do ya think withholding and hidden taxes in prices help the gov't increase taxes and spending without the populace being too upset?
C'mon FC.
My grandmother remembers when the income tax began. She's still alive.
I dunno about that - what I will say is that after cost are eliminated from prices and your net pay increases by what is now withheld (income and payroll), your purchasing power will be about the same.
And in future years, the "robuster" economy will lift everyone's standard of living. JMHO
If we're going to reform taxes,cut them,make them universal (everyone with more than $100 of income pays at least *some* tax) and establish a single rate...and eliminate that damn AMT!
It's human to fear change. Even change like eliminating one of the most odious components of America.
I just want the to see the Feds spend like the did prior to 1913. Income taxation and general taxation on this scale are not needed for the government that I envision. Though that's very idealistic, and unrealistic.
I don't see the 16th amendment disappearing anytime soon. If anything, they'll use both and really scare us.
What happened in 1913 that made spending increase without bound?
"A national sales tax would be a disaster simply because once one was instituted it wouldn't take long for the income tax to reappear."
If you think that enforcing income taxes is intrusive, just wait until you see Canadian-level-plus sales taxes. People will flock to tax havens that are evil enough to sell stuff w/o a sales tax (witness the cigarette smuggling from New York into Canada).
If you think that the income tax is sensitive to economic downturns, wait until you see what sales taxes will do. Most states now are heavily dependent on sales taxes, and most are hurting to make up lost sales tax revenue during a very minor slowdown in growth!!
No, the reason that this idea isn't adopted is that it's a bad idea.
You look at all the world economies that have a VAT, and they're all in the toilet. One darling is Denmark - with a "fair flat tax" of Seventy Five Percent
Taxation is not now nor has ever been the problem. Unlimited government spending on all levels is.
When wholesale theft is legal, you damn well better learn how to steal.
If your net pay increases to your gross pay amount, how is it that costs are removed from products? The only amount "saved" by an employer at that point would simply be the taxes paid on profit. There would be no cost reduction.
My understanding is that your net stays the same, the employer simply pays your current Net instead of the same wage minus taxes.
Course, don't argue with me, I'm just barfing up what I read here a while back on the fair tax.
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.