Posted on 07/19/2006 7:26:18 AM PDT by Arcy
The FairTax was on the primary ballots in three Georgia counties yesterday. I have the results of the voting! Here you go.
Gwinnett County:
Total Votes: 35,755 Yes - 31,068. 86.9% No - 4,687 13.1%
Cobb County:
Total votes: 39,458 Yes - 33,598. 85.15% No - 5,860. 14.85%
Fayette County:
Total votes: 11,517 Yes - 9,828. 85.33% No - 1,689. 14.67%
According to Boortz the results of this vote will be personally handed to President Bush today via a Washington insider. The purpose of which is to convey the FACT that there is great support for this solution to current tax system and that this is a plan that can get the voters to the polls. Many of which called and e-mailed Boortz to say that they had no plans of voting yesterday until they learned that the Fair Tax was on the ballot.
.
(Excerpt) Read more at boortz.com ...
"or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden."
How about this phrase?!!!
You're just mad because I pointed out your example was wrong.You said "Something wrong in that analysis. I'll have to look at it and get back to you later." Still waiting for you to get back to me with how it was wrong. Maybe I forgot the double super secret, cascading, embedded taxes (that aren't really taxes!).
And also, be sure to tell us why property taxes in CA 30 years ago are somehow applicable to today.
Increase in black market activity ... ohhhhh - scary! How about some specifics as to how this would operate under the FairTax. And I don't mean your usual nonsense, but some genuine details which you've never put forth.
It's not goofy if you take a tally board and post all of the points pro or con. You would realize that the posibility of Black-market fraud that could occur with the fair tax could never catch up to the vast illegal tax fraud and Black-market traffic in untaxed goods that exists with the current system. Have you ever heard of the BATF.
The other aspect of the Black-market you refuse to acknowledge is the fact that currently ill gotten gains are not taxed at all for any crime. With the Fair Tax they would be taxed when the criminal or his wife or other family members make a purchase. The Fair Tax has a much greater likelihood of taxing the underground economy.
I used the wrong table.
I agree with your $80,219 of purchasing power under the income tax. But I have a problem with your nrst calculation.
Assuming this famaily spends 100% of earnings on taxables....
The first thing that will happen is that pre-nrst prices fall. We've been using 9%. Dimples said 7-10% IIRC and Robfromga says 8-10%. I think it'll be more, but I'm ok using 9% for now.
So my 97000 would then be able to buy 106,593.41 worth of stuff.
Then consider the reduction in buying power the nrst causes.
They'll spend 19,600 on taxables before they begin spending money on taxes. So 97,000-19600=77400. So they'll only pay tax on 77400 of spending, which would be 17,802. The effective rate of tax then on all purchases is 17802/97000=18.35%.
Reduce what they can buy from 106,593.41 by 18.35% and the nrst guy ends up being able to buy $87,033 of stuff.
Your fairtax calculation had an error or errors besides omitting any pre-nrst price reduction. The FCA amount, and a couple addition errors maybe? It's pretty messed up. Excepting the lack of any pre-nrst price reduction, you ended up too high. Try running through it again.
But you can't compare purchasing power of the systems without taking into account ANY price reductions (or wage increase or any increase in buying power) due to the removal of costs that will be eliminated.
Well, you keep telling everyone it's 30%!
It can be either 23% ti or 29.87% te. They're the same.
Competition and the drive to maximize profits. Max price does not necessitate max profit.
The nrst base is larger, so we'll all pay less (all of us legally participating in the income tax system anyway).
That is not true.
There are two issues involved, the crime and taxes on income from the crime. You may be surprised to know that the California Franchise Tax Board does not share information re taxes paid on income resulting from criminal activity with law enforcement. However, when a drug dealer, prostitute, etc. is caught, the state estimates income from the illegal activity and if taxes have not been paid, taxes it.
The same holds true for the IRS.
Many criminals do indeed pay income taxes one way or the other. I know this because I have two friends who have worked in the illegal activities division of the Franchise Tax Board.
With the Fair Tax they would be taxed when the criminal or his wife or other family members make a purchase. The Fair Tax has a much greater likelihood of taxing the underground economy.
I fully realize you would like to believe that. It is also possible that the criminal and his family wouldn't even live in the US and that their ill gotten gains would be whisked out of the country and spent elsewhere.
He he i learn a lot from them.
I saw nothing about the consequences of Prop. 13 but everything about modern-day liberal lawmakers and government school trade-unionists feeding Big Government Socialism on the backs of individuals' productivity.
Anyone with half-a-lick-of-sense would not blame Proposition 13 for the excesses of big government. The excesses that exist now would have occurred without Proposition 13.
Your fairtax calculation had an error or errors besides omitting any pre-nrst price reduction.LOL! Somebody is "pre" brained.
The $hit is really getting deep now. In their minds, not only will there be (GAG!) "PREbates" but there will also be Pre-nrst price reductions...What kind of pre-historic mind dreams this stuff up?
No me. I'd go for it if I were worse off. The advantages IMO far, far outweigh it. But it has been the case that I have found few examples of folks being worse off - and I am always using conservative estimates.
I always assume 100% is spent on taxables, for example. I always assume there are no existing loan payments, for example, etc.
The Fair Tax has a much greater likelihood of taxing the underground economy.
I suspect you have hit the base reason why so many in the so-called income tax protest movement set themselves dead against it or any form of retail sales tax.
Those not paying taxes on the rationalization that the 16th amendment was never ratified, or a state citizen cannot be made liable for an income tax, as such folks claim for themselves, certainly have come out against going to a tax system they would find more difficult to evade, or rationalize not paying.
For that matter what would all thos tax freedom gurus do with all those unsold $49.95 untax yourself kits. They might have to go out and actually start earning an honest living.
Neener neener...
No - everyone makes mistakes.
What planet are you from? Alpha Centauri Prime?
How much crime is committed with impunity?
It is also possible that the criminal and his family wouldn't even live in the US and that their ill gotten gains would be whisked out of the country and spent elsewhere.
Stick to the debate.
In the current IRS system he would be also be offshore, therefore your point is moot.
Are you going to deny the existence of any costs that business experiences due to the income tax system?!
!!!?
You shall stand alone then.
For starters, won't a business whose wage expenses reduce by 7.21% save anything by not paying that 7.21% anymore to anyone?
Well, you keep telling everyone it's 30%!Nice try but you're still the confused fool on this one. I don't tell anyone any such thing regarding income tax...never have.
It can be either 23% ti or 29.87% te. They're the same.No they aren't, not regarding income. How does income exclude the tax you pay from the income?
I know practical applications and logic confuse you, but you seem to think you're right, so answer the question:
You have a bucket of 100 golf balls... 77 are green 23 are red...how (by your way of thinking) do the 23 red balls become 30% of the 77 green balls when they're from the same bucket?
What would you call this?
While any major decision made by voters or politicians may have its declared or intended effect, inevitably it will also manifest itself in consequences that no one anticipated, or at least acknowledged, before the fact.
California's nearly 30-year history with Proposition 13, the landmark ballot measure that slashed property taxes, is the most obvious case in point. As the state became the primary financier for schools, it sparked creation of a powerful "Education Coalition," dominated by the California Teachers Association and other unions, which made increasing state aid its central goal. And that would lead to Proposition 98, the 1988 union-backed initiative that enacted a highly complex formula for calculating the state's financial obligation to schools.
higgmeister again: Anyone with half-a-lick-of-sense would not blame Proposition 13 for the excesses of big government. The excesses that exist now would have occurred without Proposition 13.
So then, you would agree that the intended consequences of prop 13 to end waste and limit the size of government was not accomplished.
Can you see how that might also apply to the FairTax?
Red doesn't become green magically except in your world lewis!
If you compare the number of red balls to green balls (23/77), the ratio is 29.87%. This is how you choose to express the nrst rate.
If you compare the number of green balls to red balls (77/23), the ratio is 334.7%
If you compare the number of red balls to total balls (23/100), the ratio is 23%. This is how many people choose to express the nrst rate.
If you compare the number of green balls to total balls (77/100), the ratio is 77%.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Really.
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.