Posted on 10/10/2006 8:59:26 AM PDT by cryptical
LOL, what a pigdog. Just because I said post 310 instead of 319 doesn't change the substance of your lies. You still said exactly what I quoted you as saying. You are still the biggest fat liar this forum has ever seen. It's all in black and white pigdog. You are pathetic.
You are not only a liar, you must be stupid to to think other people can't see it. Just because your numerous lies are scattered in a 500 plus post thread, doesn't mean people don't see them.
Do you both agree, then, that a lowering of the entitlement rates as I have presented will automatically lower the FairTax rate???No. What entitlement rates did you present?
The rates in paragraphs (d) and (e) have nothing to do with "entitlement rates" (only you know what "entitlement rates" means. Are we expected to know what all your made up words, acronyms and phrases mean?). The sales tax rate the SS bureaucrats would determine is to extract the same amount of revenue from the SS wage base as the income tax does.`(d) Old-Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance Rate- The old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate shall be determined by the Social Security Administration. The old-age, survivors and disability insurance rate shall be that sales tax rate which is necessary to raise the same amount of revenue that would have been raised by imposing a 12.4 percent tax on the Social Security wage base (including self-employment income) as determined in accordance with chapter 21 of the Internal Revenue Code most recently in effect prior to the enactment of this Act.....
Since when is "raisng revenue" an entitlement?
"If you want to lower your tax burden (hidden or otherwise) you first need to lower government spending. The method of collection is secondary."
And if you want to lower compliance costs (hidden or otherwise), you do something about the 60,000+ page monstrosity that comprises our current tax system.
"Interesting article, lots of good arguments against the Fair Tax."
It is interesting, as well as amusing. The "pure" libertarians who want to limit government to its constitutional limits all in one fell swoop are like children. They want it done and they want it done NOW!! And if they can't get it done immediately, then they don't want to do anything that advances us toward that goal in increments.
The Libertarian candidate for governor here in GA has made the FairTax one of his main campaign themes and he is polling well above typical Libertarian candidates - I have seen some polls as high as 15%. The only real suspense in the governor's race is whether or not he can garner enough votes to force the Republican incumbent into a runoff with his Democratic challenger.
The Libertarian candidate for Lt. Governor, on the other hand, is another "purist" like the author of this diatribe, who attacks the FairTax because it doesn't accomplish everything he wants in limiting government in one fell swoop. I'm sure his opinion isn't affected by the fact that he is a tax attorney who makes his living off the current dysfunctional system. In the coverage of the Lt. Governor's race, he isn't usually even mentioned. I haven't seen any data, but it is obvious that he isn't polling enough to even rate a comment in the media's coverage.
The "purists" can keep holding their breath until they get their way, but they are just going to end up very, very purple. In the meantime, FairTaxers continue to show Americans that there is a simple and fair way to raise taxes and there are any number of associated economic benefits.
PIGDOG post 473: "I've said nothing about any Congressional action in raising the rate since that will clearly not be required."
When in previous posts you most certainly did:
post 319 by pigdog: "The infamous "unelected bureaucrats raising taxes" ploy you've continually tried (unsuccessfully) to use isn't correct and never has been. They merely determine the split of tax revenue required to fund the S/S entitlement as required by S/S law - which it should be noted isn't part of the FairTax law at all. They have no power to raise (or lower) the FairTax rate ... that's what we pay the "big bux" to Congress for."
post 328 by pigdog: "Any change in the overall FairTax rate would have to be done by Congress, not some "unelected bureaucrat".
post 351 by pigdog: " And to change the FairTax rate it would, indeed, take congressional action."
post 368 bt pigdog: "This means that the remaining portion which is the General Revenue Rate will in effect increase since the other two have decreased and the statutory rate for all three combined must be 23% (or whatever the rate ends up as in the bill) unless changed by Congress."
It is one thing to make a mistake, but to continue to lie about making a mistake is absurd. So you were wrong on posts 319, 328, 351 and 368. And then you were wrong in your denial. But why can't you admit it. You keep changing the subject and making things up. You are a bigger liar than William Jefferson Clinton. At least he appologized when caught. You remiain in denial.
"I guess I'd be less skeptical if people really did act with perfect foresight (they don't), if capital was perfectly mobile (it isn't), if transitions were immediate and impactless (they aren't), and politicians acted with the best interest of the governed (do I even need to say it?)"
That isn't an argument that is specific to the FairTax; it is an argument against virtually any substantive fundamental change in our institutions. It could even be applied to your compadres who want their Constitutionally limited government and they want it NOW!!!
Does anyone wonder why we refer to most critics of the FairTax as SQLs?
Because fairytaxers can't make logical arguements?
Does anyone wonder why we refer to most critics of the FairTax as SQLs?No there's no wondering about it, it's because you're juveniles with small minds at work.
I would much prefer a flat income tax at a reasonable rate, say 10%.
Does anyone wonder why we refer to most critics of the FairTax as SQLs?
A) Because fairytaxers can't make logical arguements?
B) it's because you're juveniles with small minds at work.
C) Because most, if not all, of the FairTax's critics (whether they are honest enough to admit it) want to perpetuate the current dysfunctional system because they have some sort of vested interest in it.
And the correct answer is ....... (I don't even need to tell you, do I?)
Pulling out the old "vested interest" card I see. I thought you were better than that. The people I know who oppose the FairTax mainly oppose it for one of two reasons: they think it looks unworkable and will or might lead to economic crisis, or they have paid income tax all their lives and don't wish to now start paying taxes as they spend the money.
re: "the current dysfunctional system" as you put it: our economic system is the envy of the entire world, and if weren't carrying half the world on our backs with our military and medical infrastructure (think CDC, etc) we would be in even better comparative shape. While the income tax hasn't created that economic miracle, it hasn't prevented it either.
So, "dysfunctional" is a mighty hard word to use when one is proposing an unproven FairTax plan that is full of obvious holes to describe a system that has allowed our economy to perform as well as it does.
It's certainly not worth my time to play "musical posts" with you when you lie about them and then won't admit you lied but claim it was a typo.
I'll just say that the FairTax rate itself isn't changed by any entitlement proportion adjustments and that the direction of those adjustments will be as I've said DOWNWARD, not upward as both you and Looey try to pretend ... and don't bother continuing your lie that you claimed the adjustments would also go down - you didn't and I've also showed that lie of yours to be a lie.
You are truly a time-wasting fool in addition to being a gross liar. And with your #538 you answer the question about whether or not you were truly that ignorant - and the answer is "YES".
"... Well you certainly showed him to be a complete liar to anyone who can read ..."No Robbie he didn't and you merely illustrate you have no idea what was being discussed - and neither does he. He can only call "liar, liar, pants on fire" like a 3 year old. And he doesn't realize what was said.
Actually he's as bad as you with your vanity posts pretending to interpret what others said and in the process completely misstating it. Two peas in a pod.
I understand exactly what was being discussed, and how you were caught with another mistake that you will never admit.
Grow up!!.
It's clear that you had no idea what was being discussed nor did you grasp what I was saying. My points stand unrefuted in spite of you childishness.
How old are you, anyway???
Tell us then - what was the discussion???
"Pulling out the old "vested interest" card I see. "
And properly so since he may have seen you blast on another thread that clearly shows your own vested interest.
You merely pretend you wish to be the savior or all humanity from the "evils of the FairTax" and were whining on the other thread about doing well under the income tax and having to pay under the FairTax. That's what happen with you big spenders, you see. You may be able to protect some of your money under the income tax but you can't under the FairTax. Your bias is quite clear.
The main question I see arising from the discussion of how the FairTax rate will adjust automatically is whether you are a pathological liar, or whether you are just ignorant of how the FairTax bill is written. I am torn between the two choices, and you seem to exhibit both tendencies at different times, so maybe there is some schizophrenia also involved. Sort of a Dr. Pig and Mr. Dog thing...
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.