Posted on 08/28/2007 4:39:18 PM PDT by Bigun
The People Must Demand The Fair Tax
By Doug Patton
August 28, 2007
Last year, during the United States Senate race in Nebraska, Republican challenger Pete Ricketts suggested that every option must be considered when looking at ways to reform our federal tax system. Among the list of alternatives Ricketts said should be on the table was a national sales tax known simply as the "Fair Tax."
The Democrat incumbent, U.S. Sen. Ben Nelson, launched an attack on his opponent that was, at best, distorted and condescending, at worst, irrational demagoguery. One would have thought that Ricketts had suggested stealing all the assets of the poor and handing them over to Warren Buffet and Bill Gates.
Recently, the panel of pundits on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," discussing the apparent rise in popularity of former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee's presidential campaign message, scoffed at Huckabee's unabashed promotion of the Fair Tax.
George Will, the token "conservative" on the panel, brushed it aside with the disbelief of an elitist who cannot understand the burden of the average worker who would love to take home his or her entire paycheck, as the Fair Tax would allow him or her to do. Will opined that Huckabee's second place showing in the Iowa straw poll was even more amazing given the fact that "he supported a national sales tax of thirty percent, which means that if you buy a one million dollar house, you'll be writing a check to the government for three hundred thousand dollars." Of course, the others on the panel readily agreed.
The elites of this country, who buy those million-dollar homes, are not enamored with the Fair Tax. They would be if they took the time to understand its appeal.
The Fair Tax would replace all federal income taxes. No more federal withholding. No more Social Security withholding. No more Medicare withholding. No more stealing from the paychecks of American workers before they even see it and then pretending to give them a refund, without interest, at the end of the year. No more saving receipts for tax deductions. No more IRS audits. No more April 15th.
Instead, the Fair Tax would put us in control. All consumer items would be taxed. Business purchases would not. By allowing us to make the determination about what we buy and when we buy it, the ability of our legislators to manipulate our behavior is eliminated. That is why the elites don't like it. They can't control the public's spending habits under such a system.
The current federal tax system is broken. It cannot be fixed. Since the inception of the federal income tax with the passage of the 16th Amendment in 1913, federal corruption and control have turned it into a Frankenstein monster that torments the people and serves the special interests. A tax on a person's income is a tax on production, and as Ronald Reagan once said, "Whatever you tax, you get less of."
Because the poor are forced to spend a disproportionate percentage of their resources to cover the tax on necessities, the Fair Tax hits them the hardest. That issue can be addressed by simply issuing a "prebate" check each month to every household in the country. Unlike disingenuous tax credits, deductions, exemptions and other loopholes in the current income tax code, a prebate check is a clean, honest method of covering the sales tax on food, clothing and shelter - up to the poverty level.
Of course, removing the income tax on corporations will reduce the cost of everything we buy, since corporations don't pay taxes. They simply pass them along to consumers. The Fair Tax plan calculates that removing the corporate income tax will result in a reduction in the cost of virtually every consumer item on the market. In fact, it will just about offset the tax on those products. Imagine paying the same price for something but having your entire paycheck to buy it.
And then there are the billions of dollars that flow untaxed through our economy today: drug dealers, prostitutes, pornographers, foreign tourists. Imagine how much revenue could be raised simply by taxing the things those people consume.
There would be no more audits, no more justifying deductions, and April 15th would become just another spring day. But only if the people stand up to the elites and demand it.
On second thought, perhaps not.
To back you up - let’s say that labor costs ARE 20 times more expensive in the US than China. But you’re likely to get 25 times the productivity for the investment -
the other considerations are taxes (and compliance costs), regulations, and other business unfriendly activities coming down from the gov’t.
208 posted on 06/29/2007 8:01:29 PM PDT by Hostage (Fred Thompson will be President.)
Check again - Chinese productivity is high. In part, no doubt because the Chinese government is not so concerned with stuff like hours worked and safety.
the fanatacism of the fair tax advocates makes one wonder if there is an smidge of truth to the involvement of the scientology people somewhere in this equation.
Just in previous threads where you asserted the absurdity that the federal gas tax is a hidden tax, you likewise exhibit gross misunderstanding of basic terminology associated with business transactions.
Gross payments means just that, the purchase amount and the added taxes. Each tax is added to the purchase price, state sales taxes, federal excise taxes and the NRST to replace embedded income and payroll taxes. These taxes are added independently.
Keep it up, you are a good advertisement for disturbed logic. I suggest you observe and ask sincere questions first before broadcasting your impairment.
Just for you:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-25
`SEC. 510. TAX TO BE SEPARATELY STATED AND CHARGED.
`(a) In General- For each purchase of taxable property or services for which a tax is imposed by section 101, the seller shall charge the tax imposed by section 101 separately from the purchase. For purchase of taxable property or services for which a tax is imposed by section 101, the seller shall provide to the purchaser a receipt for each transaction that includes—
`(1) the property or services price exclusive of tax;
`(2) the amount of tax paid;
`(3) the property or service price inclusive of tax;
`(4) the tax rate (the amount of tax paid (per paragraph (2)) divided by the property or service price inclusive of tax (per paragraph (3));
`(5) the date that the good or service was sold;
`(6) the name of the vendor; and
`(7) the vendor registration number.
Note that receipts must include the price exclusive of tax, meaning all tax, not just the NRST.
That paragraph indicates MORE PAPERWORK FOR MY BUSINESS.
You are NOT helping your cause, every justification you offer only adds to the boondoggle and onerousness of government intrusion with the “fair sales tax” absurdity.
Do you think before you engage your mouth?
Look at what you said:
“Currently employers get to deduct health insurance costs, under the FairTax they would pay 30% tax on them.”
First, under the FairTax there is no need to deduct anything because there is no income tax to avoid.
Second, health insurers like all other businesses have embedded federal taxes that will be eliminated thereby enabling them to lower costs (premiums). Furthermore, insurance proceeds are credited back.
If the Insurer’s embedded federal taxes are 23% inclusive or 30% exclusive, and they are eliminated and replaced by a 23% inclusive FairTax NRST or 30% exclusive, then employers purchasing health insurance will see no change in their cost structure. They will pay the same amount for health insurance.
These are the basic points that you and others are missing either by design or ignorance.
The principle is summarized simply as:
The FairTax replaces payroll and income taxes that already exist in hidden form in the pricing of goods and services and that occur at all levels of production.
The existing payroll and income system acts as a system of hidden VATs at each level of service and production. Removing these hidden VATs and replacing them with a consumption tax is not adding new taxes, it is merely changing the form of tax collection from hidden to visible.
Really? Says who? You?
No further comment needed.
Of course you have to run to conspiracy paranoia when you are challenged and unable to respond rationally.
I am not surprised. I have been called a liar and now I am about to be called a Scientologist.
Try reading before opening your mouth.
The NRST does not tax existing excise taxes nor does it tax state sales taxes period end-of-story.
There are none so blind that the REFUSE to see.
“The luxury tax KILLED a whole industry during its existence int he private boat business.”
Yes, of course it did. That is because buyers of yachts were able to legally avoid the tax. They can’t do that with the FairTax. If they buy a yacht or anything else outside the country and bring it home, it will be taxed when they return through customs.
You must be a very poor businessman if you think the overhead associated with the FairTax is more than the IRS demands for the income tax. That is just insane.
My wife and I and many of our friends know many women that would have liked to have had more children but could not because of current economic burdens posed by excessive federal taxation. Only a generation ago mothers were able to stay home and raise children because a single salary could carry the famiily. But today that is not the case and we know many women who are resentful of that fact.
My view is shared by many people, likely tens of millions. I did not arrive at my view in an isolated manner but after having discussed the issue with many many people.
You can tell women yourself that they should not resent having to go to work to help support their families. You should tell women yourself who want to have children to not resent putting off child bearing because they cannot afford it.
As you appear to be a woman yourself, this should be easily understood. For me, it is an issue of demographics. I have no thought to ‘force’ women to bear children, that is extreme even coming from you where I expect daily absurdities to flow from your disturbed logic.
But I am glad you posted my statement because any intelligent person can see it is a rational statement. They will wonder why you twist it into something ‘dark’ such as forcing womem to have children. Of course those that have tolerated your daily paranoic delusions would not be surprised at your extrapolation of my statement to something extreme and out of context.
The statement simply applies to those families wanting more children but who have that opportunity forclosed upon them because mothers must work. A tax structure that would relieve her family would allow her to stay home in the important role of family manager which she wants to do. For women that do not want families that choice is always available to them. But to women that want children, the choice is not always available.
How you could twist a sympathetic view of these women wanting children into something sinister? Shame on you!
Children are an immense joy to those that want them. Why should they be denied because they are forced to live on reduced budgets because of insane excessive taxation?
What a pathetic soul you are, truly disgusting.
If you have an ounce of humanity you should apologize immediately not only to me but to all women wanting children but who can’t afford them.
Look it up. It’s posted above.
If I were you I would take a hiatus from FR, you have shown yourself to be disgusting today.
You are wrong about the excise taxes. You shouldn’t flaunt your ignorance.
So now you are a sensitive man being abused for his support of women and their issues?
What you wrote says that you want to pressure women to have more babies for the good of the state. You said nothing about a women's desire to have more children except that psychological techniques should be employed to urge them towards the maternity ward and convince them that their contentment lies with the kids t home.
“However, the 16th Amendment will be repealed but the states may be allowed to administer their own income tax so long as they pay the federal government the level of taxes they have historically with year to year adjustments based on population data (apportionment).”
You cannot legislate to repeal an amendment to the Constitution, I believe that will take 38 states to ratify.
Oh really? I am wrong? Says who? You?
The NRST doe NOT tax existing federal excise taxes and state sales taxes
PERIOD END-OF-STORY.
That is one piece of disinformation that will go nowhere even with the uninformed.
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.