Posted on 07/30/2007 4:48:06 PM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Edited on 07/31/2007 9:40:17 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
The question re FAIR TAX, should not be asked in an ambush news clip in the first place -
in the second place, AFTER a private sit down with him and the FAIR TAX committee, give him time to look it over and talk with senators/congresscritters who already endorse it, etc, THEN - and privately - discuss it with him with the question being, NOT “if the senate and congress pass it//” but “Will YOU, Sir, endorse and campaign for it?”
duh - ambushing at press crunches for a sound bite is not going to make him our friend on the this issue...
The point of a flat sales tax is not to change the percentage that we pay with fuzzy math. It is to get rid of hidden taxation.Ever hear of imports? Do you know how much of what we buy is imported? Where's the hidden taxation in imports?
But what is important is that any tax rate above 10% is going to be considered too high to more than 50% of the people. This will force a change in voting and governmental spending.Oh I can't wait! How long before the sales tax is below 10% again?...Oh, and who in government is going to self inflict?
But wait. What happened to the 100% paycheck, prices about the same as now, increased purchasing power and more money to save?...Who would notice?...That's all a lie?
Domestic distribution, marketing, warehousing, shipping, and markup.
Some posters say things that indicate they’re trying to prevent the nrst from being passed. But they’re a little behind. The nrst will be passed. It’s only a matter of time. The rest of us are on to understanding the inevitable change.
I think the primary purpose of the nrst wrt imports is to help make the US more competitive. It's already difficult to compete with low, low labor costs. As it is today, we compete against those low labor costs AND importers whose tax costs are already rebated to them. The profit margin for importers is hugh compared to US firms.
Of course, the nrst will eliminate the tax advantage importers have over domestic firms. The only reason imports are priced the way they are is b/c domestic producers are at their minimum. Importers will charge just below domestics to capture market share. The nrst tax on imports will reduce importers' profitability, not increase the price - as is sometimes asserted by pro income-taxers.
For reference, the issue was whether the income tax or the retail sales tax would be more effective at making fed tax painful to the individual to the extent that there will be downward pressure on fed taxes.No it wasn't it was about comparing tax rates and apparently now that you know you have to use the gross income of both situations to make an honest comparison and it doesn't add up you're weasiling out with another subject...
But since you brought it up. How would the Fairtax promises of increased take home pay, prices about the same as now, increased purchasing power and more money to save, make the same people the Fairtaxers claim are oblivious to what they really pay, AKA, the true cost of government, more aware?
Thanks for the bumps lewisNo problem, I like Fred Thompson.
Domestic distribution, marketing, warehousing, shipping, and markup.Great, now you can demonstrate how they cascade to 20%+...use any numbers you like.
I answered the original question as posed. I will not, however, play your strawman game — one of the advantages of an NRST is precisely that it puts imports at a disadvantage to domestic goods because imports receive less (though more than zero) benefit from the removal of hidden and cascading domestic taxes.
LOL. Is that why you compared tax rates? DOH!
ANd lewis, the income tax has as a base INCOME. Hence the determination of rate uses a ratio that is taxes/income.
The nrst has as a base retail SPENDING. Hence the determination of rate uses a ratio that is taxes/spending.
Geezus.
Beyond that, the nrst doesn't promise any of the things you assert. Those are all strawmen you continually use. Everyone recognizes them. That's part of the reason your posts don't get replies about them.
And thanks for the bumps!
Who makes that claim?
I didn't say there was. But your point would be that it is better to favor foreign companies over domestic? I assume you agree that a 40% corporate tax increases the cost of the companies product?
Oh I can't wait! How long before the sales tax is below 10% again?...Oh, and who in government is going to self inflict?
Its hard to make sense of your comment here. Is your point that 10% is too much? Or is it that people would happily pay a high sales tax without changing their voting habits?
But wait. What happened to the 100% paycheck, prices about the same as now, increased purchasing power and more money to save?...Who would notice?...That's all a lie?
You've definitely left the reservation now. My post was very direct and straight forward. I'm afraid I've barely been able to understand yours.
Some posters say things that indicate they’re trying to prevent the nrst from being passed.How would they do that exactly? Oh, with the truth?
As it is today, we compete against those low labor costs AND importers whose tax costs are already rebated to them. The profit margin for importers is hugh compared to US firms.What makes you think importers aren't US/domestic firms? You ever hear of Walmart?...Of course, the nrst will eliminate the tax advantage importers have over domestic firms.
LOL. Is that why you compared tax rates?I don't compare tax rates with fictional taxes...you and AFT do.Principled:
Yes they are using marginal rates for both income and retail sales taxes. In the next paragraph, they use effective rates on the income tax and retail sales tax.And yet you compare. Albeit under false pretenses.-----
ANd lewis, the income tax has as a base INCOME. Hence the determination of rate uses a ratio that is taxes/income.
The nrst has as a base retail SPENDING. Hence the determination of rate uses a ratio that is taxes/spending.
Principled tag line:
(Vaporize the "Divide and Conquer" taxes - Have everyone pay the same marginal rate!. NRST)
Who makes that claim?You for one...you even attempted examples. You want to see them?
Walmart is a retailer Lewis. THey sell things that are imported. One of the reasons imports are cheaper is that the imports do not carry the same tax costs that US manufactured goods carry.
If US made goods were priced similarly to the imports, Walmart would sell US made goods. But US manufacturers can't make enough to stay alive without including tax costs in prices.
Did you get all that?
US goods could be more competitive with importers if US manufacturers had lower costs. THe nrst lowers the costs of domestic manufacturing. Still with me?
Along with the lower cost of domestic manufacturing helping make US manufacturers more competitive, the nrst will place a tax on the imports of foreign manufacturers. That tax will further deteriorate the competitive advantage that importers now enjoy.
Walmart is a retailer Lewis. THey don't manufacture. Sheesh. Now you're rejecting the nrst because Walmart is a manufacturer? Wow. That's like your 100-22=88 claim.
WHy not tell the REAL reason you oppose the nrst?
Anything else you find is like OReilly finding hate speech on FR. You would have to quote out of context and quote me quoting you.
Again, my claim is that taxes per se and compliance costs come to 9% of retail prices.
I assume you agree that a 40% corporate tax increases the cost of the companies product?Actually I don't. Neither does anyone else. How does it increase the cost? It does sometime result in a loss of wage, layoffs, lower return to investors, or who knows what else.
You aren't pretending that a 40% tax (even if there was one) applies to the company's gross income are you? ------ Its hard to make sense of your comment here.Is your point that 10% is too much?But your point would be that it is better to favor foreign companies over domestic?
Comprehension problem?
You said:But what is important is that any tax rate above 10% is going to be considered too high to more than 50% of the people....
I don't know exactly where you got that number but it implies that the Fairtax would have to be 10% or below before it can get approval of "more than 50% of the people" , otherwise no one will fall for the 23% scam...Or did you expect "more than 50% of the people" to fall for the 23% rate in hopes of a 10% rate later?
But wait. What happened to the 100% paycheck, prices about the same as now, increased purchasing power and more money to save?...Who would notice?...That's all a lie? You've definitely left the reservation now
Those are all Fairtax promises. If "more than 50% of the people" get those promised benefits do you think they'll be screaming for 10% tax?
Maybe you're reading confusion is a result of your writing or lack of undrestanding the Fairtax plan and their rhetoric.
Walmart is a retailer Lewis. THey sell things that are imported.They are also importers.
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.