[Dimples]

It seems there is a bit of a shift in the meaning of "embedded taxes" used in this revision of the book. Before this edition, "embedded taxes" referred to that portion of product price owing to income taxation. Now it seems to refer to formerly withheld tax ... even though it's still embedded in price.

The statement

“The prices of consumer goods and services remain essentially the same, with the removal of the embedded taxes compensating for the added consumption tax.”

is still a bit of a stretch considering that actual prices will rise by approximately the amount of the new tax ... that, however, is offset (for wage earners) by the elimination of withholding. The tax is still embedded in the price, as are the formerly withheld wages.

At any rate, the revision does indeed seem to back away from some of the more egregious falsehoods.

Now if we could get an honest appraisal of the "revenue neutral" tax rate ...

[xcamel]

Rob - did you catch my post on Costa Rica moving to the flat tax?

see: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1627193/posts

[lewislynn]

Now if we could get an honest appraisal of the "revenue neutral" tax rate ...

An honest appraisal (or any honesty) from the Fairtax crowd? HA!

[Beagle8U]

"Now if we could get an honest appraisal of the "revenue neutral" tax rate ..."

Thats easy, The fairy tax would be "revenue neutral", but would shift 100% of taxes to consumers making 15-200k, and not owning a business.

[RobFromGa]

Good to see you on this thread, Dimples. Hope things are going well for you. Nice to see that they acknowledged that they can't have their cake and eat it too. You have been on to their lies for many years-- I hope you get satisfaction that you were right...

If you get a chance, post a link to one of your earliest posts on this subject way back when...