Given that Walby is expecting employers to pass the withholdings, including the ER payroll tax back to employees, the only tax left is the corporate profit tax. It not clear how much Jorgenson allocated for compliance costs, but using the oft stated $200 Billion figure and realizing that employer wage costs remain entirely unchanged, the actual cost of the current tax system embedded in prices is only about 4%.
So to be fair, instead of subtracting 22% from Spendable Income, only 4% should be deducted. The rest is all wage cost that remains in the cost structure under the FairTax.
To correct Walby's examples, simply multiply the "Current System - True After Tax Purchasing Power" figure by 1.333.
As usual, the AFFT is double counting.
Nonsense, Dimp-Dimp. It is the Squirrels who are doing the double counting. Your interpretation of what Jorgenson said (and what he meant) is merely that - your own interpretation.
And since we know most of you specialize in the Chicken Little method of misstatement any interpretation you have is certainly suspect. Most people would surely believe the assessments of an economist before your grab-bag style of mis-choosing numbers and facts so your claims of "4%" is complete nonsense with no semblance of "fair" at all. It is merely more of your grotesquely-loaded attacks on anything FairTax.
I don't even buy your analysis of what you think "Wallby does or does not do" in her examples since you are far too eager to have another name to attack (such as Boortz). Whipping boys seem to be a favorite of the SQL Squad.
When the dust finally settles I believe we'll find that under the FairTax not only will disposable personal income go up but that the economy will be greatly assisted by the new tax system. All of this tripe aboput what you think is or is not included in one figure or another pales in comparison to those benefits.