Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Your Nightmare

Well, I could almost live with those definitions of income. It looks like it excludes about $5 trillion of the tax base, and leaves welfare and social security recipients as non-taxpaying voters, so that's not good.

It could be much improved by removing lines 2 thru 7 from the Individual form, and adding '2(d) Export Sales' to the Business form.

And be sure the SS/M tax is completely eliminated as well, and I'm on board.

Of course, to be revenue neutral, line 7 of the Individual form would probably need to be 25%.


206 posted on 05/16/2006 12:07:38 PM PDT by Kellis91789 (I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --Will Rogers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies ]


To: Kellis91789
It could be much improved by removing lines 2 thru 7 from the Individual form ...

Let's see, you don't like giving a taxpayer a minimum non-taxable living allowance from his own earnings, but you do support sending that same person/family a monthly check whether or not that person/family pays any FairTax?

Help me understand your logic.

210 posted on 05/16/2006 12:28:38 PM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies ]

To: Kellis91789
And be sure the SS/M tax is completely eliminated as well, and I'm on board.

Let's see. You could support the Flat Tax IF the SS/MC tax was completely eliminated; yet you now support the FairTax which has the SS/MC tax embeded (buried, hidden) in the rate?

Help me understand your logic?

211 posted on 05/16/2006 12:32:32 PM PDT by Dimples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson