Replies

Dear Jim Noble,

You can see that the folks who support the NRST can come up with no sensible reason for pushing for implementation of the NRST before the repeal of the 16th Amendment.

You can see that they reject the idea of including language in the NRST legislation to the effect that the NRST would only come into being once the 16th Amendment was repealed. Alternatively, constitutional amendments have been written with effective dates that were delayed, which, in this case, would provide the federal government the time to switch over from one tax collection system to the other.

You see assertions that that's not possible, but little by way of reasonable explanation why that is. Assertion without argument.

This is what is regularly offered up on behalf of the NRST.

I don't know why in the world we should encourage Congress to starting taxing us with a national sales tax before we strip them of the authority to tax our incomes.

sitetest

I believe a sensible reason is that there is no chance of ever eliminating the income tax without a replacement revenue in place. Who would eliminate the income tax without a replacement?

That said, I am not in the group you describe - I would like to have them tied.

What is your explanation as to why after 95 years we haven't had an nrst on top of our income tax? It only takes a vote and a signature.

I tbink it's because pols know voters wouldn't stand for it.

THis resistance evidenced by 95 years of inaction will be increased. Once we see what it's like without the income tax, who would ever propose it? (libs) Who would support it? (some libs in safed districts). Who would vote to pass it?

THis is of course AFTER who knows how many years to renegotiate an income tax code. Katie bar the door! Everyone will want their own pet tax and/or tax break.

I digress.

Point being that after 95 years there has been sufficient resistance to prevent a sales tax on top. Increase the resistance by showing us what it's like without it.

I'd still like to see them tied - but I fear it would prevent the nrst from seeing the light of day.

If you think we'll end up with both (after 95 years of not), then by all means tell your rep. That's what it's about.

"I don't know why in the world we should encourage Congress to starting taxing us with a national sales tax before we strip them of the authority to tax our incomes. "

Of course you don't since you're one of those opposing the FairTax; but you're welcome to correct me if I'm mistaken on that point. Wouldn't expect that you WOULD support it.

OTOH you could at least be honest in that there were some very good reasons given in this thread as to why trying such a combined, catch-all amendment as you suggest would be much worse that just a poor idea. It would be working against itself by the very provisions in the bill.

Posts #243, 247, 248, 252, 272, 297 are all replete with "sensible reasons". The fact that you wish to not accept them is solely your problem. Your attempts to brush them away with your "no sensible reason" rhetoric is just that - rhetoric. You've not refuted a single one.